Press Enter to search or select a section to narrow results

A LANDMARK DECISION   RE: First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly

A LANDMARK DECISION RE: First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly

· Sunday, May 31st 2009 at 3:30PM · 1360 views
The following post is the record of testimony given in a suit brought at common law in Minnesota in 1968 -- not all that long ago.

Explaining what the banks don't want you to know may shatter most of the public's religiously entrenched assumptions about money and banking. What the general public "thinks" it knows about money and banking is largely based upon a collection of canards gleaned from TV, radio, newspapers and their own personal experiences with money and banking.

There is no academic curriculum that offers an intellectively [sic] comprehensive course in the modern "Credit Money" mechanism and banking. There is no academic or news media that explains the awesome power possessed in having access to clearing your own checks. If you and I could clear our own checks, through our own operated check-clearing house, we could then create "checkbook" money to buy/pay for our investments, just like the banks do. Checkbook or Credit Money is not a cash currency "representing" money. Credit Money, better
known as Bank Credit, is a cash currency "substitute" that circulates in the marketplace by means of checks as cash.


First National Bank of Montgomery,
Plaintiff
vs

Jerome Daly,
Defendant

JUDGMENT AND DECREE

The above entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7, 1968 at 10:00 am. Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel, R. Mellby. Defendant appeared on his own behalf.

A Jury of Talesmen were called, impaneled and sworn to try the issues in the Case. Lawrence V. Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own behalf.

Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19 Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minn. Plaintiff claimed title to the Real Property in question by foreclosure of a Note and Mortgage Deed dated May 8, 1964 which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time foreclosure proceedings were started.

Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964 and alleged failure of the consideration for the Mortgage Deed and alleged that the Sheriff’s sale passed no title to plaintiff.

The issues tried to the Jury were whether there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant had waived his rights to complain about the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years.

Mr. Morgan admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private Bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this. Plaintiff further claimed that Defendant by using the ledger book created credit and by paying on the Note and Mortgage waived any right to complain about the Consideration and that the Defendant was estopped from doing so.

At 12:15 on December 7, 1968 the Jury returned a unanimous verdict for the Defendant.

Now therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the Constitution of United States and the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota not inconsistent therewith ;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1.That the Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minnesota according to the Plat thereof on file in the Register of Deeds office.
2.That because of failure of a lawful consideration the Note and Mortgage dated May 8, 1964 are null and void.
3.That the Sheriff’s sale of the above described premises held on June 26, 1967 is null and void, of no effect.
4.That the Plaintiff has no right title or interest in said premises or lien thereon as is above described.
5.That any provision in the Minnesota Constitution and any Minnesota Statute binding the jurisdiction of this Court is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and to the Bill of Rights of the Minnesota Constitution and is null and void and that this Court has jurisdiction to render complete Justice in this Cause.
The following memorandum and any supplementary memorandum made and filed by this Court in support of this Judgment is hereby made a part hereof by reference.

BY THE COURT

Dated December 9, 1968

Justice MARTIN V. MAHONEY
Credit River Township
Scott County, Minnesota

Documents From The Courts Files 1st National Bank Of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly, Scott County MN.

http://www.restoretherepublic.org/?p=58

Share This Article

Comments (2)

ROBINSON IRMA Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM

Thank you brother Earl,and my I please add something else that the TV education will not bring out over our public air waves.

Please pay attention to does the BANK that you have been dealing with for years and years still have the status of 'bank' ? Too many of them do not...Washington Mutual(where I was banking as they were brought out by Chase here does not have the word BAnk on its sign on our bank any more...WAKE UP.....

ROBINSON IRMA Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM

Earl, not to try and disput your,"I don't believe any state judge is bound by any other judge's decision"...and I only bring this up to ask how does Case law fit into this rational or my belief that a judge can "make law' at will.But, then tis is why we have the Supreme Court and legal ethic hearings isn't it?

And, please forgive me for reading tis statement as if this is about a "private or 'personal' dicision as I just did. O.K.? And, just leave me in my total confusion where I tend to get far too often(smile)

Post a Comment

Please log in to post comments.