Mailing Address: 1. NALJC, P O Box 186, Swanton, Indian Country Ohio 43558

THE TRADITIONAL COURT OF EQUITY FOR THE ASSOCIATION OF ORIGINAL PEOPLES’ BANDS, TRIBES, CLANS AND COMMUNITIES IN NORTH AMERICA, SOUTH AMERICA, AFRICA AND AUSTRALASIA

(INDEPENDENT SOVEREIGN NATION STATES PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 1, MONTEVIDEO CONVENTION OF 1933; Treaty of Camp Holmes, 1835 (7 Stat.474); Treaty of Fort Laramie, 1868 (15 Stats. 655)

~

Mailing Address: 1. NALJC, P O Box 186, Swanton, Indian country Ohio [43558]

2. P O Box 35, Coleville, Indian country California [96107]

Clerks of the Court : Tel: 301-455.5965 / 202-847-5570 (Washington D.C.); Tel: 780-717-8370 (Edmonton, Alberta, Canada):;

Tel: 402-403-1788 (Toledo, Ohio);

Email:

Website: www.scripturalaw.org

PLAINTIFFS: Homeowners, landowners, plantation (orchards and farms) owners of all gazetted counties in Indian Country (here insert the name of the State)

PUTATIVE DEFENDANTS

1. The Governor of the State of (here insert the name of the State)

2. The Attorney General of the State (here insert the name of the State)

3. County Tax Assessors and County Recorders of (insert number of Counties) Counties in the State of (here insert the name of the State)

Courtesy Copies to:

1. Tracy Toulou

Director, Office of Tribal Justice

U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Indian Country Washington, DC 20530-0001

2. U.S. Senator John Hoeven,

Chair, Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,

838 Hart Senate Office Building
Indian Country Washington, D.C. 20510

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHETHER THE LAND TITLES ISSUED IN THE STATE OF (insert name of State here) HAVE LEGAL, LAWFUL, BINDING, AND LEGITIMATE VALIDITY PREMISED UPON TREATIES AND INTERNATIONAL LAW:

Cause Number : SATTT/STATES/ October 1B

This Tribal Court has received several thousand Petitions claiming massive government fraud in the issuance of land grants and land titles by the State of (insert name of State here) when the issue of Indian native titles was not conclusively, legally, lawfully and legitimately settled after entry into the Union of the United States of America in 1848.

Petitioners verily believe that the United States government should not be included as a putative defendant because at that material time when (insert name of State) became part of the Union, Congress had to rely on word of mouth messages and telegraphs to sustain a belief that these messages and reports were genuine and authentic without the luxury of travelling to (insert name of State to witness firsthand the state of affairs as alleged and reported.

History proves that the New York newspapers did an excellent job in assuming the status of mouthpiece and conscience of self-interests that prevailed at that material time. It has been reported that one John O’ Sullivan, a New York newspaperman, romanticized and invented the phrase “manifest destiny” that added offensive weight and meaning to the doctrine of “discovery and conquest” with which the Marshal Court saw fit to justify the otherwise illegal usurpation of Indian lands.

A. BACKGROUND

1. Petitioners believe that Treaties are sacrosanct compacts between sovereigns under international law which the State of (insert name of the State here) in concert with the United States federal government decided to ignore, violate, breach, and otherwise abandon caution and legalities in pursuance of a common intention to defraud Petitioners. When an existing law is broken during and after cession, annexation and occupation it cannot gain traction as

new law under a new invader or occupier. Might is not right. The “castle doctrine” which has an universal appeal and application is not an exclusive privilege of the European when he intended to sail into the New World to take militarily whatever he desired inspired, impelled and encouraged by subsequent wholly biased and prejudicial legislation. There ought to be law under God’s heavens

to find solace and comfort for those original landowners whose rights are mandated in the Holy Bible in Leviticus 25:23, Proverbs 22:28 and Proverbs 23:10. Incidentally, the Holy Bible, according to a federal law, Public Law 97-280 (96 Stat.1211) of 1982 is the Word of God. So, in essence, when one violates God’s Law one breaks a federal law. When one breaks a federal law, there are punitive sanctions that can be applied and measures that can be adopted to right the wrongs and crimes. That, Petitioners claim, is civilized Christian conduct.

Petitioners further take umbrage that the United States and the state government of (insert name of State here) totally and brazenly ignored Article VI, sec. 2 of the United States Constitution which declares that Treaties are also an integral part of the supreme law of the land. When the terms of any Treaty was breached, the law was broken. Petitioners contend that the United States federal government and the State of insert name of State here) agreed to dishonor the supreme law of the land – the United States Constitution.

This Tribal Court notes that the supreme law of the land mandates no punishment for those who violate it.

2. Petitioners further believe that allege that the alarming anomaly here is that the original landowners who have lived in this continent for thousands of years had to “file a claim” to evidence their ownership. One leading school of thought that has gained traction is that these hapless landowners were not aware that such a piece of legislation existed at that material time largely due to land-hungry immigrant settlers from Europe storming into Indian Country after being encouraged to move westward to occupy Indian lands under pretext of the color of law. Homestead laws added to the fake luster of land ownership at ridiculously low prices. Territorial expansion following the unconstitutional Louisiana Purchase became the rallying cry for stealing land from Indians successfully depriving them of their livelihood as an act of true civilized Christian spirit and conduct.

Petitioners verily believe that there ought to be a law under God’s heaven to remedy this malady and malaise that continues to fester in their midst even in the 21st century when Wall Street controls Indian Country land and soil upon which every structure is constructed. The meaning of real estate is a in a real state of confusion and uncertainty with legislation disfavoring the original landowners.

3. Political maneuvering from the distant territories soon to achieve statehood gave free license to mavericks, influence-peddlers, power-brokers and lobbyists establishing their own versions of societal rules, regulations, covenants, compacts and agreements with special interests’ adherents and advocates who would misrepresent the “savagery of the wild barbaric” Indians and Tribes in Washington DC. This is the hallowed ground where oppressive laws are formulated to the distinct disadvantage of Indians and Tribes. The fact that Treaties were already concluded with the very same “wild barbaric savage Tribes” meant little or nothing to special interests to this day.

Petitioners contend that had the Indians achieved superior military power in the aftermath of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, they would be justified in “discovering and conquering” Europe and Asia as is their wont and “manifest destiny.” The Indians are a peace-loving people who welcomed the European explorers and settlers with without an abundance of caution. There ought to be a law under God’s heaven to prevent such terrorism and tyranny that assail the Petitioners today since 1492. Imagine Europe and Asia being oppressed by a superior military power.

B. APPLICABLE LAW

1. This Tribal Court does not wish to engage in citing and quoting decided cases in an effort to prove the defendants wrongdoing. We resort to higher law stemming from custom and tradition that is the source of venerated and consecrated legal principles based on ethics and morals and not self-interests. Decided cases or the doctrine of stare decisis is the not the preferred currency in tribal governments. Similar cases are not identical cases where the facts differ and thus the binding rule of precedents have no value to proactive Tribal courts. As a court of equity we determine all the facts germane to an issue, and thereafter apply our Ancient Code to the prevailing and applicable facts to see if the defendant gains leverage with the carriage of justice. The rule of law is not as crucial as the cause and course of justice in a Tribal court of equity. That is the Indian way based on our customs, mores and traditions.

2. Custom is observed as law expressed in Latin as consuetudo pro lege servatur; custom or usage is the best interpreter of laws expressed in Latin as consuetudo est optima legume interpres; the custom or usage of a place is to be observed expressed in Latin as consuetudo loci est observanda. Custom is therefore the only path to find remedies and solutions for this massive land fraud akin to the Yazoo land fraud in Georgia in the beginning of the 19th century. Custom is the consequence of obedience to God’s Word; or in reverence to the spirit or nature of man as ordained by a Supreme Being depending on whether one is theist, deist, atheist or agnostic. Custom is the ancient code of conduct which Hammurabi, Moses and Justinian codified, and later political agents and agencies emulated to frame laws, rules and regulations for the good governance of societies. Unfortunately, that was not to be as politics and politicians have a totally different DNA structure from others. They found an evil angle at the assumed freedom of framing any law they desired to serve special interests.

3. Land titles enjoying lawful ownership owing to lengthened possession (usucapion) has long been recognized in international law as a moral and legal mandate entrenched in the 1539 Sublimus Deus, a papal bull, issued by Pope Paul; the 1763 Royal Proclamation, and the 1787 Northwest Ordinance all of which recognized and validated customary native or aboriginal land titles.

The right of aboriginal or native or customary land titles has been upheld in dozens of cases in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and reluctantly by the Supreme Court of the United States. In America, territorial expansion, theft of land, and land grabbing are synonymous with the aid, assistance and advantage of legsilation

In fact, 18 United States Code § 1151 is explicit in underscoring and defining Indian Country and the issue of un-extinguished Indian titles. Federal and state courts know this is a veritable minefield which they cautiously avoid and sidestep. They never open the opportunity in court for discussing, deliberating and debating this federal law as it is a Pandora’s box which will bring forth the truth.

The legal doctrines and principles governing ownership of land and soil is best illustrated in these Latin maxims:

a) usucapio constituta est ut aliquis litium finis esset – usucapio is instituted that there might be an end to lawsuits. A lawsuit is unnecessary when an aboriginal land issue is raised. In a civilized environment this aphorism is used so as not to waste the court’s time in debating, discussing or deliberating the inexorable truth. The truth is not subject or susceptible to interpretation.

b) Qui prior est tempore potior est jure – he has better title who was first in point of time. The Indians were here first. They possessed the land outright as custodians and stewards of God’s property (Leviticus 25:23). Arguably, the Indians did not believe in private property, but that does not man their lands can be stolen ad infinitum just because they practiced the concept of communal property ownership.

c) Adversus extraneous vitiosa possesso prodesse solet – prior possession is good title of ownership against all who cannot show a better title. The johnny-come-lately European introduced the concept of fee simple, and therefore declared superior title like he was here first!

e) Jactus lapilli – the act of throwing away a stone from a building in the presence of witnesses when that structure was built on usucapion land without the consent and permission of the land/soil owner.

Indians in America ought to start a national campaign to do this act of justification.

These are settled, sacrosanct and consecrated principles of law not subject to reform or amendment at the whim of the government through its legislatures. Time honored traditions and customs should not be taken lightly. America tells the whole world that we are the beacon on the hill where the lights of freedom and liberty shine forth. Petitioners believe the lights are faulty and the lamp needs cleansing.

4. This Tribal Court is of the opinion that prior possession through Spanish and French land titles cannot be diminished, eroded or destroyed by newer legislation or treaty making exercises. If old cases are cited and quoted to decide newer cases, why is it not logically relevant and material that older treaties and laws be respected and recognized as a clear validation of good law?

5. The United States relies on the suspect doctrine of “discovery and conquest” that impelled the decision in cases like Johnson v M’Intosh (1823) which morphed into a veritable and quotable template for claims germane to aboriginal title. In this myopically distasteful case, the U.S. Supreme Court invented the “trust relationship” and the “plenary power” of Congress in determining its unparliamentary practice of making any law it desired to the detriment of fundamental human rights that has disastrously affected Indians and Indian Tribes in the New World.

Petitioners verily believe that he issue of original Indian land titles was swept under the soiled carpet of history and good conscience with complete and reckless disregard for international law and treaties in an effort to tweak, interpret, define and refine the Indian Commerce Clause – Art.1, sec.8, cl.3 of the U.S. Constitution in an unfavorable light for the Indians and Tribes. When the supreme law pf the land becomes oppressive, there is something radically wrong and faulty with Christian civilized conduct.

C. RELIEF SOUGHT

Petitioners demand:

1. that the putative defendants prove conclusively that Indian titles were indeed extinguished to every parcel of land in Indian Country (insert name of State here) ; in the event such proof and evidence are not accessible or available, then the affected Tribes and their Tribal governments presently occupying Indian Country insert name of State here) shall be compelled to issue usucapion land titles to all the homeowners in (insert name of State here) with all deliberate speed under the aegis and auspices of 25 United States Code §1301 and 18 United States Code § 1151;

2. that the putative defendants pass appropriate and adequate state legislation to effectuate the premises in (1) above;