CivilWarTalk.com - A free and friendly Civil War community.
CivilWarTalk.com
The Dispatch Depot at Civil War Talk  

Go Back   The Dispatch Depot at Civil War Talk > The Backpack - Essential Discussions > Civil War History - Secession and Politics

Civil War History - Secession and Politics Was it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 03-06-2008, 08:16 AM
Sergeant (500+ posts)
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 968
Default

.
http://www.uhuh.com/constitution/1825const.htm
The Missing 13th Amendment
Copy (yes, another one)
http://loveforamerica.freeyellow.com/13th.html

Analysis of the Real 13th Amendment
This amendment was meant to keep citizens of the United States from accepting titles of nobility from foreign powers. The best example of this would be honorary "knighthoods" given by the rulers of England to people around the world who have performed a service for humanity.
http://www.vaix.net/~captainnemo/plan/
===========================================
Esquire
A title applied by attorneys to themselves, to officers of the court, to members of the bar, and others of ill repute. No one in the United States is entitled to it by law, and therefore, it confers, no distinction in law.
In England, it is a title next above that of a gentleman, and below a knight. Camden records four kinds of esquires, particularly regarded by the heralds:
1. The eldest sons of knights and their eldest sons, in perpetual succession.
2. The eldest sons of the younger sons of peers, and their eldest sons in like perpetual succession.
3. Esquires created by the king's letters patent, or other investiture, and their eldest sons.
4. Esquires by virtue of their office, as justices of the peace, and others who bear any office of trust under the crown.
NOBILITY. An order of men in several countries to whom privileges are granted at the expense of the rest of the people.
The constitution of the United States provides that no state shall " grant any title of nobility; and no person can become a citizen of the United States until he has renounced all titles of nobility." The Federalist, No. 84; 2 Story, Laws U. S. 851.
There is not in the constitution today any general prohibition against any citizen whomsoever, whether in public or private life, accepting any foreign title of nobility. An amendment of the constitution in this respect has been recommended by congress, but it has not been ratified by a sufficient number of states to make it a part of the constitution. Rawle on the Const. 120; Story, Const. _1346.
The Court, in "Horst v. Moses", 48 Alabama 129, 142 (1872) gave the following description of a title of nobility:
To confer a title of nobility, is to nominate to an order of persons to whom privileges are granted at the expense of the rest of the people. It is not necessarily hereditary, and the objection to it arises more from the privileges supposed to be attached than to the otherwise empty title or order. These components are forbidden separately in the terms "privilege", "honor", and "emoluments", as they are collectively in the term "title of nobility". The prohibition is not affected by any consideration paid or rendered for the grant.
The prohibition of titles of nobility estops the claim of eminent domain through fictions of law. Eminent domain is the legal euphemism for expropriation, and unreasonable seizure given sanction by the targets of this amendment.
Here is the original 13th amendment to the United States Constitution that was ratified in 1819. Then attorneys caused it to disappear in order to establish their claim of superiority with Titles of Nobility over the people. The total ramifications of this earlier 13th Amendment being unlawfully removed are very serious.
Article 13, ratified in 1819, reads as follows:
If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain and title of nobility or honour, 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 following states and/or territories have published the Titles of Nobility 13th Amendment in their official publications as a ratified amendment to the Constitution of the United States in the following years:
Colorado ------- 1861, 1862, 1864, 1865, 1866, 1967, 1868
Connecticut --- 1821, 1824, 1835, 1839
Dakota ---------- 1862, 1863, 1867
Florida ---------- 1823, 1825, 1838
Georgia --------- 1819, 1822, 1837, 1846
Illinois ------------ 1823, 1825, 1827, 1833, 1839, dis. 1845
Indiana ----------- 1824, 1831, 1838
Iowa --------------- 1839, 1842, 1843
Kansas ----------- 1855, 1861, 1862, 1868
Kentucky -------- 1822
Louisiana -------- 1825, 1838/1838 [two separate publications]
Maine ------------- 1825, 1831
Massachusetts -1823
Michigan -------- 1827, 1833
Mississippi ------ 1823, 1824, 1839
Missouri ---------- 1825, 1835, 1840, 1841, 1845*
Nebraska --------- 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858, 1859, 1860, 1861, 1862, 1873
North Carolina - 1819, 1828
Northwestern Territories --- 1833
Ohio --------------- 1819, 1824, 1831, 1833, 1835, 1848
Pennsylvania --- 1818, 1824, 1831
Rhode Island ---- 1822
Virginia ---------- 1819 (ratification by 13th State)
Wyoming -------- 1869, 1876
Totals: 24 States in 78 separate official government publications.
http://www.outlawslegal.com/answers/esquire.htm

Secrets of the Federal Reserve and the London Connection
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm
In 1829, the following note appears on p. 23, Vol. 1 of the New York Revised Statutes: "In the edition of the Laws of the U.S. before referred to, there is an amendment printed as article 13, prohibiting citizens from accepting titles of nobility or honor, or presents, offices, &c. from foreign nations. But, by a message of the president of the United States of the 4th of February, 1818, in answer to a resolution of the house of representatives, it appears that this amendment had been ratified only by 12 states, and therefore had not been adopted. See Vol. IV of the printed papers of the 1st session of the 15th congress, No. 76." In 1854, a similar note appeared in the Oregon Statutes. Both notes refer to the Laws of the United States, 1st vol. p. 73 (or 74).
http://w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-13.html
================================================
THE CAMBRIAN PESHER
In the library basement, in the Special Documents Department of our local university, you will find the Statutes at Large for the State of Kansas for many of the years since its statehood, just prior to the Civil War. In the back of these volumes you will find the official text of the U.S. Constitution under which the State is governed. In that text you will find the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. Here is how the text reads:
"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."
Researchers have found the above "original" 13th Amendment in the old law books of all the States which were admitted prior to the Civil War. And a debate currently rages over the significance of this Amendment. (I obtained a notarized copy of the above, just in case said volumes "disappeared" from the library shelves, an anomaly known to occur when documents are found which embarrass the current government.)
http://www.grailchurch.org/pesher.htm
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.

Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 03-06-2008, 08:17 AM
Sergeant (500+ posts)
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 968
Default

THE GENERAL STATUTES
OF THE STATE OF KANSAS
This information was obtained from the Sedgwick County Law Library and is reproduced here from copies of the 1868 document in Kansas contained in the " Oklahoma Writ's; " Memorandum of Law supporting the "Writ of Mandamus" filed with the Supreme Court of the territorial state of Oklahoma by Dan Meador. [405-765-1415].
http://www.cascadian.com/CRC/Court/1...sEvidence.html
=============================================
Lost 13th Amendment Was Actually Ratified, Some Historians Argue
http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/story1b070500.html
More questions? Join the Project 13 Listserv for ongoing discussion of Article XIII
http://www.13th-amendment.org/FAQ.html
Missing 13th Amendment
http://www.frii.com/~gosplow/13th.html
Knighthood
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/knighthood.htm
THE UNITED STATES IS STILL A BRITISH COLONY
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/bcolony.htm

The Lawyers Secret Oath
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/secretoath.htm

Judge gets orders from England
http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Temp...d-RichardN.htm

The 545 People Responsible For All of America's Woes
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/woes.htm

Was the 14th Amendment Ratified?
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/14th.htm

Get That Gold Fringe Off My Flag
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flag.htm

War Powers Act 1933
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/1933.htm

The Oath of Office
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/oathofoffice.htm

Barefoot's World -
http://www.barefootsworld.net
Barefoot's World Links-
http://www.barefootsworld.net - 800+ Links
Barefoot's Survival Page -
http://www.barefootsworld.net
"We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will
be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time."
- T.S. Eliot
Love and Peace, Barefoot Windwalker
W. 6350 Holland Road, Post Falls, Id 83854, 208-773-9893
================================================== ============================
Clinton Mentally Ill
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/clintonmental.htm
ILLUMINATI LINKED TO WHY WACO,UT, LINKED TO CLINTON!
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/wacopg.htm
Who Waco! Probe Clinton's Ties To Riady to Rapoport to Why Waco!
~~~CONNECTING THE DOTS! - IT AIN'T OVER TILL IT'S OVER!~~~
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/ties.htm
Clinton CFR Speech - Sept. 14, 1998 Sep 15 1789 The U.S. Foreign Affairs Dept.
becomes the U.S. State Department Clinton CFR Speech - Sept. 14, 1998 - Follow
the Money!!!
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/clintoncfr.htm
The Mena Coverup
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/mena.htm
LONDON OBSERVER: CLINTON, Terrorist And Murderer...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/london.htm
Arkansas Supreme Court Committee Sues Clinton
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/arkansas.htm
Dynamite Affidavit Exposes Vast Clinton Administration Cover-Up
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/exposes.htm
... conglomerate run by the Riadys, helped introduce since-disgraced
fund-raiser John Huang to the Clinton administration, which later endorsed
Rapoport's $2 billion Chinese real-estate project. Rapoport ...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/updatenwo.htm
EENIE MENA MINIE MOE...
... the latest "Whitewash" of the Mena Arkansas drug scandal that is at
the heart of the Clinton scandals--provides a golden opportunity for all
of us to preserve our happy memories of this time ...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/eenie.htm
"The Law"!
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/apfncont.htm
Did an organized conspiracy do away with the original 13th Amendment?
http://www.civil-liberties.com/13/
A Note from APFN Webmaster:[I personally, found a law book for the State of Missouri with the Orginal 13th Amendment dated 1825] Missouri became a state in 1821
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.

Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 03-06-2008, 12:44 PM
cw1865's Avatar
First Sergeant (1000+ posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Riverdale, NJ (Morris County)
Posts: 1,215
Default bad link

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
bad link, not sure why you are pointing to that one...
__________________
The United States forever!
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 03-06-2008, 02:59 PM
unionblue's Avatar
Captain (5000+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 5,802
Default

Hanny,

Did the "other" 13th amendment ever become ratified and part of the Constitution?

Unionblue
__________________
"The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass

"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 03-06-2008, 03:08 PM
5fish's Avatar
First Sergeant (1000+ posts)
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,242
Default

[quote=Hanny;82064].
Quote:

===========================================

Hanny,

Form what I can ascertain is that TONA amendment was never ratified and if you arguing that VA did ratify it then you are wrong. There is no evidence that VA. ratified it.

All courts dismiss the issue when it comes up in court cases so find something else to twist now.
__________________

"States Rights are about States Wrongs" - Jesse Jackson
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 03-06-2008, 03:40 PM
timewalker's Avatar
Brig. General, Mod
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 936
Default

I really cannot undertand this debate over the "real" thirteenth amendment. Even if TONA was ratified by all the necessary states, people act like the thirteenth amendment banning slavery would not be part of the Constitution. The Thirteenth Amendment (as we know it) was ratified by the requisite number of states and therefore was added to the Constitution. TONA would not supercede the Thirteenth Amendment and even if it was ratified (which it was not), the Thirteenth Amendment would simply be the Fourteenth, and the Fourteenth the Fifteen, etc. Or else we would simply have two thirteenth amendments.

It is all too silly for words.
__________________
"There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals figthing in it... Of the two groups, the historians are the more belligerent." David Donald, Lincoln Reconsidered (1961)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 03-06-2008, 03:46 PM
1st Lt. (3500+ posts)
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,646
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
.
http://www.uhuh.com/constitution/1825const.htm
The Missing 13th Amendment...
Hanny, please stop trying to give people the impression this was ever ratified to become part of the US Constitution. It NEVER was.

This amendment was voted by the Congress and sent to the states in 1810. By the end of 1812, a dozen states had ratified it. But there were SEVENTEEN states in 1810 and Louisiana was admitted in 1812 , which meant ratification by fourteen states was required to complete the ratification process in that year. Other states were soon added (Indiana, Mississippi, and Illinois by 1818), raising the required total to sixteen. This was known at the time, and commented upon publicly by noted legal scholars such as William Rawle and Joseph Story. It has been known ever since by anyone who bothered to track it down. The Amendment was never closer than two ratifications short

As to the rest, yes, it has often been said and printed that this Amendment passed. There was a rash of stories about it in the 1990s when Amendment XXVII was finally ratified after 203 years. You can find it in schoolbooks and some official state publications. They are in error. Typos and errors of fact in books do not make law.

The Amendment you are referring to is one of many thousands that have been proposed over the centuries, but it is one of only 33 that have been passed by Congress. A total of 27 of those have been ratified by the states. Of the other six, two had expiration dates included and are no longer viable because they are past them. The other four are still outstanding, and that includes the one you are referring to here. Nowadays, a total of 38 state ratifications would be required, and it is still stuck at 12. This has become part of the lore of conspiracy theorists, and has been distorted into an unrecognizable (and false) legend.

The apparent reason for the confusion is that, when the Federal government asked the states about the status of this Amendment in 1818, one of them (Virginia) did not respond. The other 16 states involved in 1810 did, yielding a total of 12-4 in favor, seemingly one ratification short. But people have studied the records of the Virginia state legislature and have determined that Virginia never did ratify this Amendment. And, as noted above, new states had been admitted, increasing the number of ratifications required.

Please stop trying to maintain something else.

Tim
__________________
"Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 03-06-2008, 03:48 PM
1st Lt. (3500+ posts)
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,646
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timewalker View Post
I really cannot undertand this debate over the "real" thirteenth amendment. Even if TONA was ratified by all the necessary states, people act like the thirteenth amendment banning slavery would not be part of the Constitution. The Thirteenth Amendment (as we know it) was ratified by the requisite number of states and therefore was added to the Constitution. TONA would not supercede the Thirteenth Amendment and even if it was ratified (which it was not), the Thirteenth Amendment would simply be the Fourteenth, and the Fourteenth the Fifteen, etc. Or else we would simply have two thirteenth amendments.

It is all too silly for words.
There is a group of people who like to talk it up. One of their ideas is that it would remove citizenship from all the lawyers because they use the title "Esquire" after their names. As you say, it is very silly.

Tim
__________________
"Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 03-06-2008, 03:50 PM
cw1865's Avatar
First Sergeant (1000+ posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Riverdale, NJ (Morris County)
Posts: 1,215
Default Semantics

Quote:
Originally Posted by timewalker View Post
It is all too silly for words.
epitome of semantics
__________________
The United States forever!
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 03-06-2008, 09:49 PM
Sergeant Major (1750+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,395
Default

[quote=Hanny;82063]

This Article of Amendment, ratified in 1819 and which just "disappeared" in 1876,
-----------
It's still conspiracy theory claptrap, no matter how many fallacious websites you quote.

Regards,
Cash
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
Back to top
Bringing the American Civil War to Life. Copyright © 1999 - 2008, CivilWarTalk.com. Site Version 4.3
The American Civil War | Forum | Resource Center | Image Gallery | Links | Site Map | XML | Donations