{"id":3983,"date":"2017-08-06T22:45:28","date_gmt":"2017-08-06T22:45:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=3983"},"modified":"2017-12-10T08:34:22","modified_gmt":"2017-12-10T08:34:22","slug":"common-law","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=3983","title":{"rendered":"Common Law – body of royal decrees, customs, and judicial decisions based on moral reason instead of statutes or constitutions"},"content":{"rendered":"

common law<\/span>:
\n<\/strong><\/span>adj<\/em>. (1848)<\/span><\/p>\n

1.<\/strong>\u00a0Of, relating to, involving, or according to the common law<\/strong> <common~law doctrine>.”<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

common law<\/span>:
\n<\/strong><\/span>n.<\/em> [fr. Law French commen ley<\/em>}! \u201ccommon law\u201d]
\n( 14c)<\/span><\/p>\n

l. The body of law derived from judicial decisions, rather than from statutes or constitutions; CASELAW<\/strong> <federal common law>.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 Excerpt from Patrick\u00a0Devlin’s\u00a0The Judge<\/a><\/em>\u00a0(1979):<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u201cHistorically, [the common law] is made quite differently from the Continental code.\u00a0 The code precedes judgments; the common law follows them.\u00a0 The code articulates in\u00a0<\/span>chapters, sections, and paragraphs the rules in accordance with which judgments are given.\u00a0 The common law on the other hand is inarticulate until it is expressed in a judgment.\u00a0 Where the code governs, it is the judge\u2019s duty to ascertain the law from the words which the code uses.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span>Where the common law governs, the judge, in what is now the forgotten past, decided the case in accordance with morality and custom and later judges followed his decision.\u00a0 They did not do so by construing the words of his judgment.\u00a0 They looked for the reason which had made him decide the case the way he did, the ratio decidendi<\/em> as it came to be called.\u00a0 Thus it was the principle of the case, not the words, which went into the common law. so historically the common law is much less fettering than a code.<\/span>\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0[6]<\/span><\/p>\n

federal common law<\/span>:
\n<\/strong><\/span>(1855)<\/span><\/p>\n

1.\u00a0The body of decisional law derived from federal courts when adjudicating federal\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>questions and other matters of federal concern, such as is disputes between the states and foreign relations, but excluding all cases governed by state law.\u00a0 *\u00a0 An example is the nonstatutory law applying to interstate streams\u00a0<\/span>of commerce.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

general federal common law<\/span>:
\n<\/strong><\/span>(1890)<\/span><\/p>\n

1.<\/strong>\u00a0Hist<\/em>. In the period before Erie v. Tompkins<\/em>, 304 11.8. 64, 58 S.Ct, 817 (1938)<\/a>, the judge-made law developed by federal courts in deciding disputes in diversity-of-citizenship cases.\u00a0 *\u00a0 Since Erie, a federal court has been bound to apply the substantive law of the state in which it sits. So even though there is a \u201cfederal common law,\u201d there is no longer a general federal common law applicable to all disputes heard in federal court.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

common law<\/strong><\/span>:<\/strong><\/span>
\n(second definition)
\nnoun<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

2. The body of law based on the English legal system, as distinct from a civil-law system; the general Anglo American system of legal concepts, together with the techniques of applying them, that form the basis of the law in jurisdictions where the system applies<\/strong> <all states except Louisiana have the common law as their legal system>. Cf. CIVIL LAW (7).<\/span><\/p>\n

American common law<\/span>:
\n<\/strong><\/span>(1824)<\/span><\/p>\n

1. The body of English law that was adopted as the law of the American colonies and supplemented with local enactments and judgments.\u00a0 <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

2. The body of judge-made law that developed during and after the United States\u2019 colonial period, especially since independence.<\/strong>\u00a0 aka\u00a0Anglo-American\u00a0<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/span>common law<\/strong><\/em><\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 Excerpt from\u00a0Guardians of the Poor v. Greene<\/a>\u00a0<\/em>(Pa. 1813):<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u201cEvery country has its common law. Ours is composed partly of the common law of England and partly of our own usages. When our ancestors emigrated from England, they took with them such of the English principles as were convenient for the situation in which they were about to place them<\/span><\/strong><\/span>selves. It required time and experience to ascertain how much of the English law would be suitable to this country. By degrees, as circumstances demanded, we adopted the English usages, or substituted others better suited to our wants, until at length, before the time of the Revolution, we had formed a system of our own, founded in general on the English Constitution, but not without considerable variations.<\/span>\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0[8]<\/span><\/p>\n

common law <\/strong><\/span>(n.)<\/em>:<\/strong><\/span>
\n(second definition)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

3. General law common to a country as a whole, as opposed to special law that has only local application<\/strong> <the issue is whether the common law trumps our jurisdiction\u2019s local rules>.<\/strong> – aka jus commune<\/strong><\/em><\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Excerpt from John Salmond’s\u00a0Jurisprudence<\/em><\/a> (1947):<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u201cIn its historical origin the term common law (jus commune)<\/em> was identical in meaning with the term general law . . . . The jus commune was the general law of the land\u00a0\u2014 the lex terrae<\/em> \u2014 as opposed to jus speciale<\/em>.\u00a0 By a process of historical development, however, the common law has now become, not the entire general law, but only the residue of that law after deducting equity and statute law.\u00a0 It is no longer possible, therefore, to use the expressions common\u00a0<\/span>law and general law as synonymous.<\/span>\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0[9]<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Excerpt from Lon L. Fuller’s\u00a0Anatomy of the Law<\/em><\/a>\u00a0(1968):<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u201c[I]t is necessary to dispose briefly of a problem of nomenclature; European equivalents of the expression \u2018common law\u2019 have been used, especially in Germany, to describe an emergent system of national law, based on the Roman model, that came into existence before national parliaments undertook to enact laws for the nation as a whole.\u00a0 In this use, \u2018the common law\u2019 (gemeines Recht)<\/em> was used to distinguish the commonly shared tradition of Roman law<\/a> from local statutes and customs.<\/span>\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0[10]<\/span><\/p>\n

4. The body of law deriving from law courts as opposed to those sitting in equity<\/strong> <a mortgage founded in common 13W>.\u00a0 *\u00a0 The common law of England was one of the three\u00a0main historical sources of English law.\u00a0 The other two were legislation and equity.\u00a0 The common law evolved from custom and was the body of law created by and administered by the king\u2019s courts.\u00a0 Equity developed to overcome the occasional rigidity and unfairness of the common law.\u00a0 Originally the king himself granted or denied petitions in equity; later the task fell to the chancellor, and later still to the Court of Chancery.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Anglo-Saxon law<\/span>:
\n<\/b><\/span>(18c)<\/span><\/p>\n

1.<\/strong>\u00a0The body of royal decrees and customary laws developed by the Germanic peoples who dominated England from the 5th century to 1066.<\/strong>\u00a0[1]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 Thomas Jefferson provided a very telling quote in regards to the history<\/em> of English Common Law in his\u00a0letter to political reformer John Cartwright, 5 June 1824<\/a>, wherein he stated:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 “I was glad to find in your book… of the Judiciary usurpation of legislative powers; for such the judges have usurped in their repeated decisions that Christianity is a part of the Common law. the proof of the contrary which you have adduced is incontrovertible, to wit, that…<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>(continued in the below graphic)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 …\u00a0<\/strong>(continued)<\/em>… but it may amuse you to show when, and by what means they stole this law in upon us. in a case of Quare impedit<\/em><\/a> in the year-book 24. H. 6. folio. 38. [anno 1458.]…<\/span>” <\/strong>[2]<\/span><\/p>\n

In Summary:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 Common Law is based on\u00a0what most people would call\u00a0<\/em>common sense- “Well\u00a0of course\u00a0<\/em>that’s how things\u00a0should\u00a0<\/em>be-\u00a0that <\/em><\/span>just makes\u00a0sense!<\/span>” <\/em>\u00a0In fact- one of the most famous writings in American history is called Common Sense<\/a> by Thomas Paine<\/a>– whose writings exemplify\u00a0exactly why Common Law must remain intact; it is the “Checks & Balances<\/a>” of the 3 jurisdictions, designed to\u00a0prevent commercial codes<\/a> (see Admiralty Law<\/a> which is “the law of the sea”) from circumventing The Law of The Land. \u00a0<\/em>Common Law is designed to ensure that money is used “to regulate commerce” instead of being used “to enslave people\u00a0beneath the often otherwise subversive laws of economics”. \u00a0Here’s an excerpt from Paine<\/a>‘s famous pamphlet which circulated throughout the Colonies from 1775-1776, called Common Sense<\/a>:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0“Mankind being originally\u00a0equals\u00a0<\/em>in the order of creation, the equality could only be destroyed by some subsequent circumstance; the distinctions of rich-\u00a0and poor. \u00a0Oppression is often the\u00a0<\/em>consequence… of riches.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Male & female<\/em> are the distinctions of nature,\u00a0good & bad\u00a0<\/em>the distinctions of heaven; but how a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest, & distinguished like some new species-\u00a0is worth investigating, & whether they are the means of happiness or of the misery to mankind… the evils of hereditary succession…<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Men who look upon themselves\u00a0born to reign,\u00a0<\/em>& others to obey, soon grow insolent\u00a0(showing rude & arrogant lack of respect)…\u00a0<\/em>their minds are early poisoned by importance… when they succeed to the government they are frequently the most ignorant & unfit of any throughout the dominions.<\/span>“<\/strong> [3]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 When most people think of the legal system, they think of the\u00a0Bill of Rights<\/a>,\u00a0Treaties with Native Americans<\/a>,\u00a0“Gold Standard” currency<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 &\u00a0so on.<\/em>\u00a0 However, sometimes laws don’t make sense.\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>They aren’t\u00a0just<\/span>.\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0Maybe a Supreme Court Ruling appears\u00a0immoral.\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>That is the beauty of the royal common law.\u00a0 If you can articulate your rationale into a form which makes moral and logistical sense\u00a0\u2014 you can take\u00a0<\/a>bad laws off the books\u00a0<\/em>or go to court yourself<\/a> and set a precedent by proving a previous judicial determination, act of congress, or other “law that became law”\u00a0wrong<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>That is why traditional common law also<\/em><\/span>\u00a0includes\u00a0<\/em>“the common sciences to\u00a0which we are all bound”<\/strong> (i.e, gravity, physics<\/a>, ecology<\/a>, ethnobiology<\/a>, resource management, etc.).\u00a0<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0Yep\u00a0\u2014\u00a0leave it to the Germans\u00a0<\/em>to protect science via the legal system.\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0But not just sciences.\u00a0<\/em> The<\/span> right to grow your own food<\/em>\u00a0& work a piece of land is also protected according to U.S. common law: this is known as the\u00a0<\/span>right to homestead<\/a><\/em>.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span>In fact,\u00a0<\/span><\/em>the term “homestead” is actually a legal term designed to protect a person who is “living with the land” from having their home foreclosed on them because they cannot afford expenses.\u00a0 The notion goes that, as famous legal articulant John Locke wrote in\u00a0Second Treatise of Government<\/i><\/a>, Chapter V, paragraph 33:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0“Nor was this appropriation of any parcel of land, by improving it, any prejudice to any other man, since there was still enough and as good left, and more than the yet unprovided could use. So that, in effect, there was never the less left for others because of his enclosure for himself. For he that leaves as much as another can make use of, does as good as take nothing at all. Nobody could think himself injured by the drinking of another man, though he took a good draught, who had a whole river of the same water left him to quench his thirst. And the case of land and water, where there is enough of both, is perfectly the same.<\/span>”\u00a0<\/strong>[4]<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Former Herrenvolk Democracy
\nProtectionism Gone Awry:<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0While common law, in theory, contains countless merits, its history was not borne in the concept that “all men are created equal”: it is rooted in a form of protectionism which initially sought to protect its borders from being overrun by other races, & eventually devolved into slavery & colonialism.\u00a0 The concept of a “master race” is a sector of common law that is blatantly contradicted by the “moral” aspects of common law, but unfortunately this concept has not yet<\/em><\/span>\u00a0been easy to uproot from the psyche of mankind.\u00a0 Where common law fails, however, civil law stands<\/a> firm in order to constitute the mission of U.S. law.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\n<\/div>\n

Knowledge of Traditional Common Law is Vital<\/em><\/span>\u00a0for Human Rights and<\/em>\u00a0for The Planet:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Unlike Admiralty Law<\/a>, which regulates\u00a0commerce<\/a>,\u00a0Common Law\u00a0is designed to protect “the common person” from commercial\u00a0overreach. \u00a0“Natural\u00a0rights”- the right to responsibly tend a piece of land & grow food in the soil\u00a0(“Homesteading”), the right\u00a0to forage, fish, or hunt\u00a0(“subsistence” aka “survival”)- these are not more concepts- they’re also legal terms. \u00a0Below is a short list of “common law”\u00a0legal terms,\u00a0followed by\u00a0common law\u00a0procedural knowledge which helps explain how to\u00a0apply\u00a0these terms through\u00a0the courts<\/a> in order to have your rights enforced.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Right to Homestead<\/span> – the right to occupy land for use as a home, wherein the land house, and outbuildings are exempt from execution an forced sale for collection of a debt by creditors.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

(Resources for Homesteaders<\/a>)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

squatter<\/span>:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

“<\/strong>(18c) 1. Someone who settles on property without any legal claim or title. \u00a02. Someone who settles on public land under a government regulation allowing the person to acquire title upon fulfilling specified conditions.”<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

squatter’s rights<\/span>:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

“<\/strong>(1855) The right to acquire title to real property by adverse possession, or by preemption of public lands.”<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

(several more common law terms coming very soon)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0There are 11 Forms of Action<\/a> <\/strong>according to traditional common law.<\/strong> \u00a0<\/span>Today, these 11 forms of action<\/a> have been\u00a0simplified<\/em> into the modern\u00a0Civil Action<\/a><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

A Great Political Conundrum of Our Era:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 Traditionally, under English Common law, there must be “A Verified Complaint<\/a> from a Damaged Party” in order to prosecute someone. \u00a0Today, the Common Law system has been simplified\u00a0into the modern\u00a0Civil Law<\/a> system. \u00a0Once a Complaint<\/a> is filed, the Defendant is guaranteed their inalienable “5th Amendment Right to Due Process”- meaning they “get their day in court” & cannot be prosecuted based on allegations alone- one must “prove the facts in court”. \u00a0The “fact based” legal system is designed to prevent innocent people from being prosecuted as has been done historically) based upon mere allegations (accusations). \u00a0Many Europeans & others were murdered historically after being accused of being “witches” or “pagans” & other non-sense like that. \u00a0We are an “evidence & fact” based system in order to prevent manipulative predators from hurting innocent people. \u00a0You may be accused of a crime, but here in America you have a “right to due process”- so\u00a0don’t be afraid of the courts!<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\u00a0<\/span> \u00a0 \u00a0As for \u201cCommon Law Courts\u201d, anytime someone is charged under the Common Law, there must be a \u201cdamaged party\u201d. You are free under Common Law to do anything you please, as long as you do not infringe on the life, liberty, or property of someone else. \u00a0You have a right to make a fool of yourself provided you do not infringe on the life, liberty, or property of someone else. \u00a0For instance, when you cross over the state lines in most states, you will see a sign which says, ” BUCKLE YOUR SEAT BELTS – IT’S THE LAW. ” \u00a0This cannot be Common Law, because who would you injure if you did not buckle up? Nobody. Being made to buckle up is a form of compelled performance- but Common Law cannot compel performance.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Any violation of Common Law is a CRIMINAL ACT , & is punishable. \u00a0The stipulation, however, is that under Common Law the Officers must be able to present \u201ca verified complaint from a damaged party\u201d; if they are unable to present such complaint, then they went outside their jurisdiction, & the accused must not only be found innocent, but they also then have the Right to collect Restitution<\/a> for damages &\u00a0for \u201cPersonal Injury<\/a>\u201d via performing\u00a0a \u201cCivil Action<\/a>\u201d.<\/strong> [4]<\/span><\/p>\n

Definition of\u00a0<\/span>PERSONAL INJURY<\/a>:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

“A non physical injury that occurs due to wrongful eviction, slander,<\/span><\/span> false arrest<\/a> or by violating the right to privacy of any person.<\/span>“<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

References:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

[1]:\u00a0All definitions, unless otherwise specified, from\u00a0Black\u2019s Law Dictionary\u00a0Deluxe Tenth Edition\u00a0by Henry Campbell Black & Editor in Chief Bryan A. Garner<\/a>. ISBN: 978-0-314-62130-6<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

[2]:\u00a0\u00a0National Archives, Founders Online,\u00a0“Letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824”:\u00a0https:\/\/founders.archives.gov\/documents\/Jefferson\/98-01-02-4313<\/a><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

[3]: “Common Sense, Of Monarchy and Hereditary Succession”\u00a0by Thomas Paine: www.ushistory.org\/paine\/commonsense\/sense3.htm<\/a><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

[4]:\u00a0\u00a0John Locke’s\u00a0Second Treatise of Government<\/a>, Chapter V, paragraph 33:\u00a0\u00a0www.gutenberg.org\/files\/7370\/7370-h\/7370-h.htm<\/a><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[2]\u00a0Patrick\u00a0Devlin, The Judge<\/a> 177 (1979).<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

[3]:\u00a0Guardians of the Poor v. Greene<\/em><\/a>, 5 Binn. 554, 557 (Pa. 1813).<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

[4]:\u00a0John Salmond, Jurisprudence<\/em><\/a> 97 (Glanville L. Williams ed., 10th ed. 1947).<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

[5]:\u00a0\u00a0Lon L. Fuller, Anatomy of the Law<\/em><\/a> 133 (1968).<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0[6]: “The U.C.C. Connection” by Howard Freeman:\u00a0www.freedom-school.com\/the-ucc-connection.html<\/a><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

common law: adj. (1848) 1.\u00a0Of, relating to, involving, or according to the common law <common~law doctrine>.” common law: n. [fr. Law French commen ley}! \u201ccommon law\u201d] ( 14c) l. The body of law derived from judicial decisions, rather than from statutes or constitutions; CASELAW <federal common law>. \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 Excerpt from Patrick\u00a0Devlin’s\u00a0The Judge\u00a0(1979): \u00a0 \u00a0 … Continue reading Common Law – body of royal decrees, customs, and judicial decisions based on moral reason instead of statutes or constitutions<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":3296,"menu_order":3,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3983","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3983","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3983"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3983\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10572,"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3983\/revisions\/10572"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3296"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3983"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}