The District of Columbia Act of 1871

Our response: If you were to take the Act out of its historical context and, from the present looking to the past, imagine who the parties involved are, we might agree. However, it is highly unlikely that anyone can ever understand any historical effect by looking from the present to the past. Therefore, we find the only way to truly understand that, or any, Act is to follow our: Standard for Review.

Following the Standard for Review, we can resolve the inquiry, not by delving into the Act in its entirety, but by simply discovering who the involved parties along with comparing a small portion of the historical background to the effects of the Act. Because in 1871 Corp. U.S. did not exist, the date of the Act shows it was made by the original jurisdiction Congress (set by the Constitution for the United States of America). The Act itself describes its venue as: “all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia”. The District of Columbia was originally provided for in the Constitution for the United States of America (9-17-1787) at Article 1 Section 8, specifically in the last two clauses.

Then, on, July 16, 1790, in accord with the provisions of those clauses, the Territory was formed in the original District of Columbia Act, wherein the “ten mile square” territory was permanently created and made the permanent location of the country’s government, that is to say, the “territory” includes the actual government. Under the Act, Congress also made the President the civic leader of the local government in all matters in said Territory.

Then on, February 27, 1801, under the second District of Columbia Act, two counties were formed (incorporated) and their respective officers and district judges were appointed. Further, the established town governments of Alexandria, Georgetown and Washington were recognized as constituted and placed under the laws of the District, its judges, etc. The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly called this act the “District of Columbia Organization Act” or the “Charter Act of the District of Columbia” and recognized it as the incorporation of the “municipality” known as the “District of Columbia”.

Then, on, March 3, 1801, a Supplementary Act to that last Act added the authority that the Marshals appointed by the respective District Court Judges collectively form a County Commission with the authority to appoint all officers as may be needed in similarity to the respective State officials in the states whence the counties Washington and Alexandria came, those being Maryland and Virginia, respectively.

According to the United States Supreme Court those charter acts (first acts) were the official incorporation of the formal government of the District of Columbia as chartered by Congress in accord with the Constitution’s provision. Again, the Supreme Court called that body of government “a corporation”, with the right to sue and be sued. Since 1801 The District of Columbia has been consistently recognized as a “municipal corporation” with its own government including (but not limited to) the right to sue and/or be sued as such.

That sets the basics for the first rule of our Standard for Review, ‘know the parties’. Thus, what we have here presented is sufficient to show the basics of who the parties are as they related to resolving the answer to the question above. We admonish everyone to prove the facts for themselves by their own supportive research.

The second rule from our Standard for Review is: “Then you must understand the environmental nature of the relationship.”

With that in mind let’s consider the events of the time: the Civil War had recently ended and the country was still under Lincoln’s Conscription Act (Martial Law). Congress had at least three problems they could see no way to directly cure by following the laws of the land: they were out of funds, they had promised 40 acres of land to each slave that left the South to fight for the North and they had to reintegrate the South back into the Union; which they could not do without controlling the appointment of the Southern States Congressional members. There were other problems but these three stand out from the rest. Of course, for the purposes of this review, that is enough information about the environment of the relevant relationships; however, the more you study the historical events of this time the more obvious the relationships will become and the more proof you will amass to prove the facts of what actually happened. In the interest of time and space in this response we will move on.

The last step of the Standard for Review’s discovery process requires a review of the actual terms of the relationship. Thus, we review the first paragraph of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 where:

Knowing the government of the District of Columbia was already “created into a government” and was so formed into a municipal incorporation in 1801 under the District of Columbia Acts, we wonder, even with Congress’ constitutional authority to pass any law within the ten mile square of the District, how do you create, or incorporate, for the first time (which is what is meant by “organic”) a municipal government that has already been in existence as a municipal corporation for over 70 years?

The obvious answer is, “It’s impossible!”

There is no lawful way to pass a new “Organic Act” when the Charter Act is already in place, because the two words (organic and charter) have the same meaning—The First Act. Even Congress cannot change history; though historians can make it appear to change; by rewriting it for those unwilling to study the past from its actual records. The records speak for themselves only if we study them.

Respectfully, when you consider the historical facts, the only meaning left for the terms given in the opening paragraph of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 (and that which follows) is, the municipal corporation that was created is a private corporation owned by the actual government. Accordingly, the only government created in that Act was the government formed by the mere governing authority any private corporation has within the confines of managing its own corporate construct. Thus, we call it: “Corp. U.S.” We also note Congress reserved the right, granted them in the Constitution, to complete dictatorial authority over their Corp. U.S. construct, without regard for its internal operations or officers. Thus, as a matter of law, Congress can use Corp. U.S. within the ten mile square of the District of Columbia as they see fit.

However, outside of that specifically defined venue, the only way they can exercise their respective authority is by agreement with other agreeable parties. To that end, they formed their Social Security System (see: Corp. U.S. Mythology myths 8, 9 and 10).

https://teamlaw.net/DCOAeffect.htm