Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The "Lost" Thirteenth Amendment
Bank Index ^

Posted on 08/18/2002 5:32:42 AM PDT by Suzie_Cue

The "Lost" Thirteenth Amendment, by Lisa Giulani

The "Lost" Thirteenth Amendment
by Lisa Guliani

“…If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honor, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.”
~ The 13th Amendment to the Constitution ~

“…A country cannot be both ignorant and free.”
~ Thomas Jefferson ~

“The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the republican model of government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American People.”
~ George Washington ~

Have you ever noticed how many lawyers there are in our government? We see them everywhere, in both high and low level positions. This is nothing new. Roughly half of our Founding Fathers were lawyers. As far as the top spot in government, 21 of our former Presidents were lawyers (or well-read in the law). The most recent former U.S. President just so happens to also be an attorney - Bill Clinton – who is, conveniently, married to another attorney, Hillary Rodham Clinton - Senator of New York. Of those former Presidents who were lawyers, one was called the “Dark Horse” President (James Polk), another was the only U.S. president to never marry (James Buchanon), and still another married the daughter of a banker (William McKinley). This last example will segue nicely into a discussion about lawyers and bankers and a little known amendment to the Constitution numbered 13.

The 13th Amendment to the Constitution? Not familiar with it? It’s no wonder. No one ever discusses the 13th Amendment – in fact, our so-called government has been ignoring its existence since the 1800’s. However, it has been the subject of some controversy in certain circles, and for good reason. You see, the 13th Amendment, also called the “Title of Nobility” Amendment, which prefaced this article – deals with prohibiting LAWYERS from holding positions of public office within the U.S. government.

But, wait a minute. Lawyers are EVERYWHERE in our government, aren’t they? We see them scurrying around like little cockroaches all through the corridors of our federal buildings. Attorneys are constantly vying for public positions – in fact, it seems that the only way to even GET many of these governmental positions is to BE a lawyer. We have come to accept this as commonplace, standard practice – a requirement, even. We may not like or trust this practice, but it has always been the way things were done. Or is it? Why haven’t we heard more about this 13th Amendment if such an important piece of legislation prohibits attorneys from holding these positions? Well, that is an interesting tale, but it may not surprise you very much. It is yet another example of the dog-and-pony show being performed before the American people, and is why we see the lawyers swarming all over government like germ-infested cockroaches spreading disease and polluting public policy. When this piece is finished, I am going to go wash my hands.

Let’s go back to the time of the American Revolution now. America, in those days, reigned as a shining example of how a unified people could overthrow a tyrannical European monarchy and win a great struggle against oppression. The European monarchs at that time saw America as a huge threat to their very survival. They despised everything that America symbolized, and felt threatened enough to want to destroy us, so they plotted and connived and went to extraordinary means to justify a desired end.

In order to subvert our system of government, the monarchs decided to play dirty pool and exert some clever counter-revolutionary maneuvers utilizing the now-familiar English bankers. We’ve said their names a zillion times, so you know who they are by now. The monarchs, in collusion with the bankers, used money as a way to get people to commit treason. Yes, when they say money is the root of all evil, they’re not kidding. The royal paranoids even sent spies to America to infiltrate our system of government.

In my research, I came across some interesting documents on the missing 13th Amendment. Of particular interest to me was one which refers to researcher David Dodge, who found a book in the Library of Congress Law Library which he discovered in the rare book section, titled “2 VA Law,” which is un-catalogued. The volume “reveals a plan to overthrow the constitutional government by secret agreements engineered by lawyers.” As Dodge puts it, “There is no public record that this book even exists.” What?? Secret scheming by lawyers? Imagine that. Sound farfetched to you? It sounds right on the “money” to me. Throughout our history, bankers and lawyers have worked in conjunction to rule the world and destroy the United States. They almost succeeded a few times, and now look who’s at it again… Take the Depression of the 1930’s, for example, which was a classic case of illicit banking practices that impacted hard working members of society in extreme ways over an extended period of time. Ask any elderly person to tell you about the Great Depression. If they can recall the past, they will surely provide explicit information about the harrowing days of that period. In current times, politicians, lawyers, bankers, and governmental agencies work together like some malignant tumor raging through the nation - further contaminating an already infected system, spreading more political and economic disease throughout the Machine and the country. Who suffers? We all do – everybody that is, except for the bankers and the lawyers, who always seem to float to the top of the cesspool.

The 13th Amendment is also called the “Title of Nobility” Amendment because it refers to the word “Esquire,” which was (and still is) used by attorneys behind their names. The word comes from the English. Back in the old days, the allegiance of “Esquire” lawyers was called into question by our forefathers. Why? Because they couldn’t be trusted as far as you could throw them. An attorney with a title behind his name was deemed loyal to the monarchy in those days - therefore, our ancestors wanted to prohibit any person bearing such a title or those receiving “honors” (exemptions the rest of the citizenry are not privy to) from holding public office. I think it’s safe to say that people in general regard lawyers warily to this very day, with good cause. Why? Because things haven’t changed a whole helluva lot. They just leave a bad taste in your mouth…

The reasoning behind the proposal of the 13th Amendment was so that those persons (lawyers) in political power positions could not dictate or influence public policy by using their skills to destroy or subvert the government. In fact, the 13th Amendment makes it very clear that any person within the ranks of government holding public office, found to have a title of nobility or to be accepting “honors” must lose his position and FORFEIT HIS CITIZENSHIP to the United States. Wow!! This is a serious penalty! Our Founding Fathers considered “titles of nobility” a great threat to the continuity of the Republic, and so this penalty was added to the amendment to get the point across that such titles would not be tolerated in American government. The 13th Amendment was put into place to protect the People from corrupt, dishonest lawmakers. (What happened along the way?) At the time of its proposal in 1789, and thereafter, there were forces opposed to its ratification. Gee, does this come as any surprise? We know who they were – and are. THEY were and are the Controllers and their henchmen – and THEY will tell you that this amendment was never ratified. However, there is evidence to suggest that this is just another lie among a dung-heap of lies we have been fed. THEY blow a lot of smoke up the ole chimney, don’t they?

Webster’s dictionary defines the word “honor” this way: “Anyone obtaining or having a privilege over another.”

Researcher Dodge uses a modern example of a judge as one who accepts “honors”. Let’s face it, judges are granted perks which we “common” citizens are not. I’m sure you and I can think of other governmental positions that afford “perks” or “honors”. Incidentally, if you are not a lawyer, you will never be a judge in these modern times. Sorry, but it isn’t like days of old when one didn’t have to be a lawyer to counsel another in court, or to hold positions like attorney general. In the early times of our country, a citizen could obtain such an office without having to be an actual attorney. Try that now and see how far you get. Let’s just say that the corporate UNITED STATES will not recognize the ordinary citizen in this manner.

The 13th Amendment sought to keep lawyers from gaining a political advantage over others, thereby restricting them from achieving power and control over the rest of us. And, despite the fact that many of the Founding Fathers were attorneys, they realized quite keenly how easily a person skilled in that profession could exploit the system and the citizenry by using legal prowess, political savvy and government/corporate connections to personal advantage. They wanted to ensure that each person had equality under the law. At least those great men had some scruples. It’s a shame that legislation proposed by men of real honor and integrity was overridden by some corrupt, greedy power-mongers lacking any scruples, honor, or integrity of their own.

At the time of its initial proposal in 1789, and again in 1810, there were 17 states in the Union. To become part of the Constitution, the 13th Amendment had to be ratified by 13 of the 17 states. It is fully accepted that ratification was achieved in 12 states. They are, according to the National Archives:

Maryland –12- 25-1810
Ohio – 1-31-1811
Kentucky – 1-31-1811
Pennsylvania – 2-6-1811
Delaware – 2-2-1811
New Jersey – 2-13-1811
Vermont – 10-24-1811
Tennessee – 11-21-1811
Georgia – 12-13-1811
North Carolina – 12-23-1811
Massachusetts – 2-27-1812
New Hampshire – 12-10-1812

Virginia was the final state required to ratify the 13th Amendment and add it to the Constitution. However, conveniently enough, a little thing called the War of 1812 got in the way. It is interesting to note the timing of the War of 1812 coincided with the proposal of the 13th Amendment. Very interesting. Focus on Virginia’s position on the ratification of this amendment waned due to the ensuing war and so, that state’s decision was not made known until 1819.

The Virginians, it appears, RATIFIED the 13th Amendment by the method of publication and dissemination, which is allowed by the Constitution. This was perfectly well within their right. The state of Virginia published a special edition of the Constitution in a re-printing of the Virginia Civil Code on March 12, 1819. This special edition contained all Amendments, including the 13th. So, the 13th Amendment has an official date of ratification, as published in the special edition of the Constitution and Virginia Civil Code by the state of Virginia. The date is, as stated, March 12, 1819.

The Constitution accepts publication and dissemination of an Amendment as evidence of a legislatures’ position in a ratification process. I wonder why the corporate UNITED STATES does not. According to Alfred Adask and David Dodge, who conducted extensive research on this subject, this publication/dissemination process is what is known as “prima facie” evidence and a fully acceptable way of conducting the business at hand. Virginia, therefore, counted as the required 13th state to make the 13th Amendment a LEGITIMATE addition to the Constitution. Since it has not been repealed, it is still the law today, unless you ask someone in the CORPORATE UNITED STATES PHONY BALONEY GOVERNMENT. (Pardon the cyber screaming, but the corporation likes the cap-lock key.) Nobody pays any attention to adhering to the 13th Amendment, of course, because it is somehow considered NOT RATIFIED, which is ludicrous. This is clearly evidenced by the scores of lawyers infesting Washington, resistant insects that crawl all over Congress, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. It’s ironic, because the 14th Amendment is in full effect, and what proof do we have that THAT was ever ratified? You will even see the 14th referred to as “purportedly ratified”. Yet, the difference is this: the 13th Amendment does NOT benefit the corporation known as the UNITED STATES, while the 14th Amendment DOES. Ahhh, there’s the rub…

The corporate UNITED STATES continues to breed and disperse more lawyer cockroaches throughout the halls of injustice, where they continue to metastasize like an insidious cancer and pollute public policy with evil manipulations. What are ANY lawyers doing in public office? THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE AT ALL.

What do you have to say about this, Virginia? How does it feel to have your vote discounted and swept under the rug? What does the rest of America have to say about it? Shall we persist in allowing this BREACH of the Constitution to go on? Times are changing swiftly, my friends, and the waters are rising higher and higher. The political and economic coals are hotter than ever, and I wouldn’t count on anything in this country “remaining the same” for much longer.

Are WE, Americans, so complacent and comfortable that we choose to ignore the LAW ourselves – even when we KNOW about it? Every single lawyer IN PUBLIC OFFICE today should be placed under the spotlight of the 13th Amendment. Period. Our Founding Fathers spelled it out quite clearly, yet nobody listened. Now we have an infestation, a massive swarm. Can you imagine how much we could clean up our alleged government if we got rid of the lawyers that aren’t supposed to be there in the first place? Wow, what a concept. Wouldn’t it be nice to say, Bye-Bye Hillary? You know it would. And that’s just for starters. Just think about all we could accomplish if we set our minds to cleaning house for real. The implications are enormous!!

The Founding Fathers wanted this Republic to sustain. They handed us the tools with which to accomplish this objective. We did not use them well. Some have not been used at all. It is now time to learn how – and we’d best do it quick. We can no longer afford to be ignorant, complacent, silent, or lazy. We cannot afford to be too comfortable and consumed with our own personal situations. America needs our help if it is to survive. We have, in the past, forfeited OUR roles in the bigger picture, believing “government” would take care of us. “Government” has FAILED to do so. The corporate UNITED STATES takes care of its own. Not you and me. We have the RIGHT, RESPONSIBILITY, and the OBLIGATION to correct this situation. We need to INVOKE the 13th Amendment. We need to ASSERT ourselves as we have not done since the American Revolution. We need to take control of Information Dissemination and restore OUR POWER AS SOVEREIGNS over a corporation that has usurped both its power and its limitations. We MUST dissolve the monopolistic evil circle that controls what we see, read, and hear. We MUST free ourselves from the chains that bind us into slavery and begin immediately - because, I tell you, if we do not, the window of opportunity will slam down and be closed forever.

We CANNOT and MUST NOT allow the Controllers, with the help of their henchmen (lawyers and bankers) to succeed in destroying America. The very survival of our nation depends upon what we do today and tomorrow and all the tomorrows we have left.

I guess it comes down to whether or not WE, THE PEOPLE, have a backbone as our ancestors did. Whether or not WE believe strongly enough in those ideals we like to sing about. Are you a Patriot – or have comfort and complacency made you a coward? Think long and hard before you answer that one. If you wait too long, you can kiss your perceptions of “freedom” and “comfort” goodbye, because, like the 13th Amendment, which lies like a ghost in a forgotten grave, if good men continue to do nothing, they will see those “comforts” they now enjoy vanish before their eyes – and America, Land of Liberty, will be lost to us and our children.

Mark Twain says it best: “In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man and brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.”

Where does your loyalty lie? With the corporation of the UNITED STATES OR with America? We don’t need to “kill” all the lawyers, as the popular T-shirt says. We need to get them out of government.

Let’s STOP the Machine.



TOPICS: Conspiracy
KEYWORDS: 13thamendmentscam; checkbeforeyoupost; conspiracy; daviddodge; dunderheads; fruitbats; hoax; howmanymoretimes; idiots; jackasses; lostamendment; missingamendment; missingamendmenthoax; morons; tinfoil; tomdunn
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-60 next last

If the terrorists hate us for our freedoms….
The simple solution is to take our freedoms away

1 posted on 08/18/2002 5:32:42 AM PDT by Suzie_Cue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Suzie_Cue
Virginia, therefore, counted as the required 13th state to make the 13th Amendment a LEGITIMATE addition to the Constitution. Since it has not been repealed, it is still the law today

A minor point: It's not in the Constitution.

2 posted on 08/18/2002 5:39:28 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
Another minor point : the State of Ohio didn't ratify the income tax admendment when the rest of the ratifying states did, but RETROACTIVELY more than 40 years later.

Another minor point : Even if/when any person can prove the process was not followed correctly, the lawyers in government (including judges) simply rule that it was intended. If someone proved beyond doubt that the income tax of today is unconstitutional and illegal, I have no doubt that the courts would nonetheless order its enforcement "because of national security". This applies as well to any that would cause loss of bereaucratic authority . Those that gain power NEVER willingly give it up.

3 posted on 08/18/2002 5:56:17 AM PDT by hoosierham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham
Those that gain power NEVER willingly give it up.

Then it must be TAKEN from them.

4 posted on 08/18/2002 6:35:20 AM PDT by Pern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Suzie_Cue
It is kinda strange that Slavery (XIII) falls between the XII and XIV that covers electors and qualifications.....
5 posted on 08/18/2002 6:49:21 AM PDT by JohnPaulJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *Conspiracy
Index Bump
6 posted on 08/18/2002 7:05:34 AM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Suzie_Cue
You forgot a tinfoil hat warning. This is pure drivel.
7 posted on 08/18/2002 7:08:55 AM PDT by TheOtherOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheOtherOne; dighton; Orual; aculeus
They're cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs...


8 posted on 08/18/2002 7:10:52 AM PDT by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: general_re; Cultural Jihad; Kevin Curry
This is part of the 'Constitutionalist' drivel that fringe freeper Matthews believed in, leading him to blow away the cop in Massillon, Ohio a week ago. His paranoid ravings accepted this nonsense about the '13th Amendment' and took it to it's logical conclusion: Since all legislatures and Congresses since this time included lawyers, the laws they passed were unconstitutional! He then said that since these laws, including traffic laws were illegal, he had a right to resist them with murderous violence.

It looks like JimRob will have some real cleaning up to do around here after he gets back from the Friva!
9 posted on 08/18/2002 7:21:49 AM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TheOtherOne
>This is pure drivel.

Prove it. Please disprove the premise of the post.

I Corps

10 posted on 08/18/2002 7:22:19 AM PDT by I Corps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: I Corps
Prove it. Please disprove the premise of the post.

There is no reason to argue with psychos who believe this stuff, they are all going to the same part of hell that Matthews is in.

11 posted on 08/18/2002 7:27:57 AM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: I Corps
I will humor you for a minute or two.

Why have some people thought the 13th Amendment is about attorneys?

The has been some debate in the past as to the usage of the term "Esquire", still used by many attorneys today. Originally, there was no Bar Association in the United States, and those attorneys who were members of a Bar Association at all belonged to the Bar Association in Great Britain. If "Esquire" was considered to be a "title of nobility" as prohibited by the Constitution of the United States, then these people would be in violation of American law, and under the 13th Amendment, would lose their citizenship. We have since found that many of the participants in the ratification of the 13th Amendment used the term "Esquire" themselves, and sometimes right in the official correspondence pertaining to the ratification of the 13th Amendment itself. Therefore, if that particular affectation was thought by some to come under the prohibitions against titles of nobility, then it certainly wasn't seen that way by the gentlemen who wrote, supported, and actually ratified the amendment themselves.

12 posted on 08/18/2002 7:29:08 AM PDT by TheOtherOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: general_re; AppyPappy; Orual; aculeus; BlueLancer; one_particular_harbour; hellinahandcart; ...

13 posted on 08/18/2002 7:32:57 AM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TheOtherOne
I will humor you for a minute or two.

I am humoring you by talking about an Amendment that does not even exist. Hmm, what does that say about me? Me thinks I should stick to trying to disabuse people about real problems in government.

14 posted on 08/18/2002 7:33:07 AM PDT by TheOtherOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lucius Cornelius Sulla
It looks like JimRob will have some real cleaning up to do around here after he gets back from the Friva!

My, are we going to CENSOR what we don't agree with??

I just love Amerikans like you who believe in Free Speech and Discussion.

Does the 1st read "You have the right of free speech just as long as you are not dumb enough to use it"??

CATO

15 posted on 08/18/2002 7:39:51 AM PDT by Cato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TheOtherOne
"Esquire" and "Sir" are not titles of nobility. They are references to peerage, a step below nobility. If memory serves, "Baron" is the lowest of the noble ranks.
16 posted on 08/18/2002 7:41:37 AM PDT by Junior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cato
My, are we going to CENSOR what we don't agree with??

Sorry, if Free Republic gets to be known as a site that endorses cop-killing, I can't afford to be a member. Timothy McVeigh fans are hazardous to a Websites health!

17 posted on 08/18/2002 7:42:52 AM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TheOtherOne
I am glad Ronald Reagan never won "Best Actor". It's every bit as much of a "title of honor or nobility" as "Esquire".

Someone needs to tell these people the difference between a title and an affectation.

18 posted on 08/18/2002 7:43:29 AM PDT by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: I Corps; All
Prove it.

I'm not a lawyer, but in my casual reading of the article:

In fact, the 13th Amendment makes it very clear that any person within the ranks of government holding public office, found to have a title of nobility or to be accepting 'honors' must lose his position and FORFEIT HIS CITIZENSHIP to the United States

it seems the intent was to prevent lawyers and others in power in government from being influenced by favors from leaders in other governments, particularly England.

If I recall my history correctly:

Maryland 12- 25-1810
Ohio 1-31-1811
Kentucky 1-31-1811
Pennsylvania 2-6-1811
Delaware 2-2-1811
New Jersey 2-13-1811
Vermont 10-24-1811
Tennessee 11-21-1811
Georgia 12-13-1811
North Carolina 12-23-1811
Massachusetts 2-27-1812
New Hampshire 12-10-1812

We were at war with England at this time (1812), and emotions were running high. I'm reading the John Adams book, and I know that jealousies and animosities ran high against the US long after we set down our arms against the Brits.

My reading of the situation is that some in government for some reason felt that anyone accepting priveliges from a foreign concern needed to be treated as a traitor.

Isn't that what we all said about Clinton, and his dealings with the Chinese and James Riady?

19 posted on 08/18/2002 7:43:55 AM PDT by IncPen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: hellinahandcart
I am glad Ronald Reagan never won "Best Actor". It's every bit as much of a "title of honor or nobility" as "Esquire".

He won a Golden Globe Award for Hollywood Citizenship in 1957. I *knew* he was a Globalist/Trilat/Mason/Bilderberger all along.

;-)

20 posted on 08/18/2002 8:04:39 AM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson