Recoupment for Indemnification

Lieber Code Articles:

40. There exists no law or body of authoritative rules of action between hostile armies, except that branch of the law of nature and nations which is called the law and usages of war on land.

41. All municipal law of the ground on which the armies stand, or of the countries to which they belong, is silent and of no effect between armies in the field.

42. Slavery, complicating and confounding the ideas of property (that is, of a thing), and of personality (that is, of humanity), exists according to municipal or local law only. The law of nature and nations has never acknowledged it. The digest of the Roman law enacts the early dictum of the pagan jurist, that "so far as the law of nature is concerned, all men are equal."


so, when we come in as if we are the "ideas of property (that is, of a thing), and of personality (that is, of humanity)" we are claiming "ownership" which is "slavery" and "slavery" only exists as part of "municipal or local law only" as "the law of nature and nations has never acknowledged it" and that law is SILENT and of NO EFFECT for "there exists no law or body of authoritative rules of action between hostile armies, except that branch of the law of nature and nations which is called the law and usages of war on land".

Of which, Article 55 states the occupying state is administrator and usufructuary and must administrate the property in accordance with the rules of usufruct as a result of the implementation of Article 43 of the Hague as consideration for the "forced pledge" under article 134 of the Lieber Code which then cause issuance of a "receipt for indemnification" which can be exchanged for a "special mention in the treaty of peace wherein the occupying army remains as a condition of the same"

Now, since this was all done in "infancy", UCC 3-305 there is an inherent claim in recoupment of "quiet enjoyment in original jurisdiction" and the FACT the state has NO RIGHT to "person and the property of a foreigner" for a "foreigner continue to be a member of their own nation" [law of nations book 2 articles 107-109]

UCC 3-305 (a ) (1) a defense of the obligor based on (i) infancy of the obligor to the extent it is a defense to a simple contract (ii) duress, lack of legal capacity, or illegality of the transaction which, under other law, nullifies the obligation of the obligor … which means one can "withdrawl" and redeposit via a special contractual relationship or "treaty" to "conclude the war".

And since there is a "state of emergency" ... the assignment of the reversion is an "olive branch" in acceptance of the treaty of peace offered under 12 USC 95a (2) and 12 USC 95b and the surrender of the usufructuary interest provides security of the person per 4th amendment for safe harbor in harmony with the Law of Nations, book 2, articles 104-105 as "special deposit" [special mention in the treaty of peace concluding the war per lieber code article 2] and one should now have "innocent passage" [safe harbor] for sureties have been provided [usufructuary interest] as per Law of Nations, Book 2, articles 132-134.

UCC 3-306 A person taking an instrument, other than a person having rights of a holder in due course, is subject to a claim of a property or possessory right in the instrument or its proceeds, including a claim to rescind a negotiation and to recover the instrument or its proceeds. A person having rights of a holder in due course takes free of the claim to the instrument.

UCC 3- 102 (a) Subject to subsection (c) and Section 3-106(d), "holder in due course" means the holder of an instrument if: (2) the holder took the instrument (i) for value, (ii) in good faith, (iii) without notice that the instrument is overdue or has been dishonored or that there is an uncured default with respect to payment of another instrument issued as part of the same series, (iv) without notice that the instrument contains an unauthorized signature or has been altered, (v) without notice of any claim to the instrument described in Section 3-306, and (vi) without notice that any party has a defense or claim in recoupment described in Section 3-305(a).

UCC 3-102 (c) Except to the extent a transferor or predecessor in interest has rights as a holder in due course, a person does not acquire rights of a holder in due course of an instrument taken (i) by legal process or by purchase in an execution, bankruptcy, or creditor's sale or similar proceeding, (ii) by purchase as part of a bulk transaction not in ordinary course of business of the transferor, or (iii) as the successor in interest to an estate or other organization. (qualified heir; attorney )

… each court case is an attempt to qualify the claim of successorship/heirship over the “interest” or “thing” [estate or other organization; Name and NAME] but since we come in thinking we ARE the thing, we volunteer into servitude as a thing by way of defending against the “complaint” instead of enforcing our claim in recoupment under UCC 3-102 (a)(i) and (ii) which is “quiet enjoyment in original (native) jurisdiction” for each matter associated with “Name/NAME interest” is a proceed.



Click here to go back


Creative Commons License
All works herein are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.