March 20, 2018

Shuffling The BLM Swamp Or Spreading The Disease

I predict these people are getting promoted.. The attack is going to spread out.. Only damned fools cannot see this for what it is.. obviously these people are fully indoctrinated with the UNEP-Agenda 2100 mental disorder and the purpose is to spread it not extinguish it.. Scott, you’re a damned fool..And this web site I’m sharing is loaded with mythological garbage, is controlled opposition, is the reverse double speak Hegelian answer to the left wing controlled opposition, both leading those leftist rightist paradigmers down the vary same primrose path with thorns to the identical solution, conclusion.. On the way there they provide no real solutions backed by real evidence as answers. NONE!

Shuffling the Swamp: BLM leaders shifted to other agencies in Interior reorganization


Appeals to Emotions, Hormones And Controlled Thoughts

A wide range of scientific possibilities when it comes to messing about with folks thinking, and of course appeals to emotions.. Yep, I read this stuff too.. It’s fascinating.. They put it all out in plain sight and nobody wonders and nobody cares.. Besides looking up folks ought to be looking things up. But shucks, nobody would want to mind control everyone using these methods.. Just because the scientific possibility exists to do it doesn’t mean anyone would be doing it… Who would ever be so evil as to teach people what to think and destroy their capacity to think with lies backed up by endocrine physiology using drugs to mess with the psyche of say entire societies.. Who’d be so nefarious that they’d chemically alter people into being comfortably numb.. Maybe even causing a boy to have girlish emotions and girls to have boyish emotions.. They could do all kinds of science with this science.. They could get people to believe anything..

“The field of basic endocrine physiology has advanced considerably since Martin’s earlier Textbook of Endocrine Physiology was published, and the 95% new material in this volume reflects how the entire concept of the nature and function of hormones has changed. The book takes a biochemical approach to vertebrate and particularly human endocrine physiology, and emphasizes methods of hormone action.”


Transgender Tranny’s FTMs Imitation Game


I Think Therefore I Am

I’m glad we live in a country where we can with rational logical reasonable words and terms push back against complete idiocy..

“I think its great that we live in a country where there are medical solutions to address being trapped in the wrong body. And maybe someday there will be a medical solution, when it comes to dealing with small minds”—Nancy; Wild life News – 1-31-2018

Now remember those at the Wild Life News are highly intelligent which is likely the reason they post in an echo chamber where any winning arguments against their foolishness is not allowed to disgrace the pages there..

A small mind is a terrible thing to waste…


Maine State Senator Davis: Lessen the Punishment for Hunting Over Bait

It’s a beginning I guess! Maine Senator Paul Davis has introduced LD 1816, an amendment that will lessen the punishment for hunting over bait.

Earlier this year, the Legislature, after making changes to a bill that came out of committee, passed LD 1083, that would, after a second offense, make the offender ineligible, for life, to buy a hunting license. No other similar legal offenses carry such draconian measures. Sen. Davis doesn’t believe “the punishment included in the new deer baiting law fits the crime.” I completely agree.

Now, what is it going to take to get the Maine Legislature to revisit the illegal law they passed last year where they opted to punish hunters and fisherman more than any other group if they were caught destroying private property – in this case, “No Trespassing” signs.

LD 557 states that, “The hunting and fishing licenses of a person convicted of destroying, tearing down, defacing or otherwise damaging a property posting sign in violation of section 10652, subsection 1, paragraph B must be revoked, and that person is ineligible to obtain a hunting or fishing license for a period of one year from the date of conviction.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled previously in cases involving “unconstitutional animus” that you cannot punish one group over another for a similar crime. While the SCOTUS has tiptoed around cases where state’s rights and “sovereignty” are involved, under no other cases decided by the SCOTUS have they wandered very far from the ruling that regardless of whether a state thinks it has a right to make laws, they cannot inflict biases, especially social ones, against one group over another.

As one example, in U.S. Department of Agriculture vs. Moreno, Congress attempted to pass a law that would deny “hippies” Food Stamp Benefits. Members of Congress openly admitted their intent of this law was because of their refusal to accept “hippies” as part of their idealistic social existence. Regardless, SCOTUS said no. This unconstitutional animus, in essence, violated Due Process.

I applaud Sen. Davis’ desire to correct a disparate law that hinders due process while at the same time targeting hunters, but someone in Augusta needs to step up to the plate and correct LD 557 that destroys the due process allowed under the U.S. Constitution through unconstitutional animus. All licensed hunters and fishermen should be incensed that the Maine Legislature would specifically and unequally target these two social groups for punishments that are held in reserve to other preferred groups.

If the Maine Legislature corrects this problem, as they should, they must then correct LD 557.


History of The American {Common Law} Bar

Countless researchers are so far ahead of the average modern day “patriot” in this research it’s comparable to a high school graduate expecting a preschooler to understand 12th grade level instructions… Not going to happen.. Especially when they act like they know it all by placing their hands over their ears and eyes and insist upon ignoring the conclusion of the lessons..

“There has been so much written on the bar by the patriot community that is wrong that I went to a source that is impeccable. All that you will see on the following works that is added to this intro will come directly from Charles Warren, the author of The History of The American Bar. A lot of the material will confirm what has been said about attorneys and a lot will correct myths about attorneys. It would be a disservice to Warren for me to interject my comments. You will learn something about “common law” that no so called patriot has ever brought forth.”

“There are 585 pages to this book and I have read it twice, fully. Then I went back and book marked those pages that I thought would be good for this article. There is so much to learn from this book because it is not a law book but the history of the Bar in this country. Warren’s last printing was in 1966 by Little, Brown and Company. The Congress card number is 66-24357 should you wish to get it from the Congressional Library. I do not know if it is in print anymore so you would have to ask a book store to see if they can get you a copy. This is educational material and not sold to you, but to inform you of certain aspects that you would not know had you not read this book and therefore does not violate any copyright laws.. This book I obtained from The Clemson University Library. I now put the preface of the book here to start you off and The First American Address to Lawyers by Cotton Mather 1710. Any words that looked like they are spelled wrong is the way they were spelled at the time of the writing of the book and you will see one of them in this preface and others in the address.. Footnotes will be (1 ) and stay on the same page so it may look like the footnote is part of the writing when it is not, so watch for footnotes. Each addition will go by chapters from the book . The Part 1 contains 9 chapters and Part II contains 11 chapters but no chapter will be completely entered.. Part II ends in the 1910 era on Law books.”—The Informer


This book is not a law book for those who wish to study law. It is an historical sketch for those who wish to know something about the men who have composed the American Bar of the past, and about the influences which produced the great American lawyers.

Part of the material in this book has been previously published in a work which had a limited circulation among subscribers interested in the history of a particular law school. I have now revised, corrected and amplified this material, in order to present it in such form as may be of interest and of value to American lawyers in general.

So far as I know, no effort has ever hitherto been made to bring together from the innumerable scattered sources the scanty information existing in relation to the early Colonial Bars in this country. Part One of this book, therefore, is an attempt to show the legal conditions in each of the various American Colonies during the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries and prior to the Revolutionary War. In each, the status of the Common Law as applied by the courts is described; the methods of appointment and composition of the courts are set forth; and an account of the leading lawyers, together with brief biographical data, is given. The legislation regarding the legal profession in each Colony is stated in some detail. A chapter is devoted to a thorough description of the materials for, and methods of, a lawyer’s education in those early days; and another chapter gives an account of the Colonial Bar Associations and of the Colonial lawyers who received their education or who became barristers in the Inns of Court in London.

In order to correlate the progress of the legal profession in England and America, two chapters are concerned with a description of the state of the law, the law books and reports, the lawyers and the courts of England in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, thus bringing into view contemporaneous legal conditions in the two countries.

Part Two of this book portrays the growth of the American Bar from the foundation of the United States Supreme Court to the opening of the Civil War. One chapter describes the curious and interesting widespread prejudice against lawyers as a class and against the Common Law as a relic of English dominion, which existed from I786 until after 1800. Three chapters are devoted to the composition of the Bar of the United States Supreme Court during the three eras between 1789 and 1860,- the first era ending with the dose of the War of I8I2 in I815; the second ending with the zenith year of the reign of Chief Justice Marshall in 1830; and the third covering Chief Justice Taney’s career and ending with the year 1860. In these chapters, the leading cases argued before the Court from year to year are taken up and described, not as mere cases deciding points of law, but as striking events in legal history. Particular attention is given to the great lawyers who acted as counsel in the various cases, to the manner of the argument, and to the effect produced by the decisions upon the surrounding conditions of the times, economic, social and legal.

Much resort has been had to contemporary letters and newspapers in depicting the actual part that each case played in its own time, and the actual weight which the eminent counsel had upon the decisions of the Court.

Care has been taken to give in foot-notes the date of birth of all the lawyers of distinction, together with a few other data, such as their college graduation, admittance to practise and appointment to legal official positions, so that the book in this way may serve as a handy reference for short legal biography. (1) A chapter is devoted to the history of all the early law professorships and law schools from I784 to 1830.

The rise and development of American law books is shown in two chapters giving practically complete lists of all the most important legal works of this country between I785 and 1860, with the date of their appearance.

And in order to make plain the influences which developed the American Bar from the small group of men of which it consisted at the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, to the vast and influential body which composed it at the end of the succeeding half century, three chapters have been devoted to the four great factors in the development of the Bar,- the rise and growth of corporation and of railroad law between 1830 and 1860, the expansion of the Common Law to meet the new economic and social conditions arising between 1815 and 1860, and the weighty movement for codification between 1820 and 1860. These three chapters are written from a purely historical point of view, and do not attempt to state legal doctrines as they may be found in law books, but to describe rapidly and graphically the progress of American law as a highly important factor in American history.

Charles Warren.

(1) My authorities for dates are chiefly Appleton’s Cyclopedia of American Biography (1898); Biographical Annals of the Civil Government of the United States, by Charles Lanman (1876); and the various biographies cited in the notes infra.


“IT was a Passage in a Speech of an Envoy from His Brittanick Majesty to the Duke of Brandenburgh, twenty years ago: ‘A Capacity to Do Good not only gives a Title to it, but also makes the doing of it a Duty.’ Ink was too vile a Liquor to Write that Passage; Letters of Gold were too Mean to be the Preservers of it ….

“GENTLEMEN: Your Opportunities to Do Good are such, and so Liberal and Gentlemanly is your Education . . . that Proposals of what you may do cannot but promise themselves an Obliging Reception with you. ‘Tis not come to so sad a pass that an Honest Lawyer may, as of old the Honest Publican, require a Statue merely on the Score of Rarity ….

“A Lawyer should be a Scholar, but, Sirs, when you are called upon to be wise, the main Intention is that you may be wise to do Good …. A Lawyer that is a Knave deserves Death, more than a Band of Robbers; for he profanes the Sanctuary of the Distressed and Betrayes the Liberties of the People.

To ward off such a Censure, a Lawyer must shun all those Indirect Ways of making Hast to be Rich, in which a man cannot be Innocent; such ways as provoked the Father of Sir Matthew Hale to give over the Practice of the Law, because of the Extreme Difficulty to preserve a Good Conscience in it.

“Sirs, be prevailed withal to keep constantly a Court of Chancery in your own Breast …. This Piety must Operate very particularly in the Pleading of Causes. You will abhor, Sir, to appear in a Dirty Cause. If you discern that your Client has an Unjust Cause, you will faithfully advise him of it. You will be Sincerely desirous that Truth and Justice may take place. You will speak nothing which shall be to the Prejudice of Either. You will abominate the use of all unfair Arts to Confound Evidence, to Browbeat Testimonies, to Suppress what may give Light in the Case ….

“There has been an old Complaint, That a Good Lawyer seldom is a Good Neighbor. You know how to Confute it, Gentlemen, by making your Skill in the Law, a Blessing to your Neighborhood. You may, Gentlemen, if you please, be a vast Accession to the Felicity of your Countreys …. Perhaps you may discover many things yet wanting in the Law; Mischiefs in the Execution and Application of the Laws, which ought to be better provided against; Mischiefs annoying of Mankind, against which no Laws are yet provided. The Reformation of the Law, and more Law for the Reformation of the World is what is mightily called for.”

[Bonifacius ~ An Essay upon the Good that is to be Devised and Designed by those who Desire to Answer tho Great End of Life and to Do Good while they Live. A Book offered first in General unto all Christians in a Personal Capacity, or ix a Relative; then more particularly unto Magistrates, unto Ministers, unto Physicians, unto Lawyers, unto Scholemasters, unto Wealthy Gentlemen, unto several Sorts of Officers, unto Churches, and unto all Societies of a Religious Character and Intention, with Humble Proposals, of Unexceptionable Methods to Do Good in the World. — By Cotton Mather (Boston, 1710).]


Beam Us Up Scotty!! We Gonna Sue The S[s]tate We Gonna Sue The S[s]tate

Listen Carefully, for only $26.00 You Too Can Save America….

Today being 19 hours ago..Yesterday.. Scotty gonna save Hunting ranching farming fishing and America with A copy of Brooms Maxims of the law 8th edition 1882… Shit man if I’d only known all these years I could have thrown my copy of that trash at them and ended this chaos…

# 57122 at lawbookexchange dot com for only about $26.

It is Broom’s Maxims of the Law, 8th ed. 1882. The maxim discussing sovereign immunity is “the king can do no wrong”.

I will be ordering it today. Thank you!
S. Rockholm~

Absolute 100% waste of time.. But go ahead.. It’s the only way you are going to FINALLY catch up…

Who owns the common law? You’re gonna find out…We already did years ago…

The Traditions of Men Are Laws For Fictions –
The ownership of law is the ownership of the ‘traditions of men’, and as traditions, law are personally owned private fictions –

It is most instructive to read –
Of American Canon Law, or of the National Canon Law of the United States, pages 53 – pages 54, which in part reads as follows,
Q. What is meant by American canon law ?
A. By the national eccl. law of this country we understand the various derogations from the ” jus commune, ” or the different customs that exist among the churches in the United States, and are sanctioned or tolerated by the Roman Pontiff. We say, ” are sanctioned or tolerated by the Roman Pontiff ” ; for, as was seen, no national law can become legitimate except by at least the tacit or legal consent of the Pope. Again, the ” jus particulare ” of a nation always remains subject to the authority of the Holy See in such manner as to be repealable at any time by it. Hence, the jus nationale, or the exceptional ecclesiastical laws prevalent in the United States, may be abolished at any time by the Sovereign Pontiff.
The entire book is worth a read.

The common law still remains a ‘civil law system’ in the ownership of fictional traditions originating with man – the clergy being the fountain of its issuance – when we read,
The phrase “the common law of the civil law systems” means those underlying laws that create a distinct legal system and are common to all its elements.
Jus commune

‘In the civil law. Common right; the common and natural rule of right, as opposed to jus singulare, (q. v.) Mackeld. Rom. Law,’
Whose common and natural rule of right ? That is to say, common and natural right belonging to whom; in whose interests ?

The owner.. They own the State, the states, and they own the law.. All of it…

In the officially sanctioned encyclopedia of the Church, ‘Catholic Encyclopedia’, we read, second paragraph –
“Canon law may be divided into various branches…”
Under the fifth bullet-point, we find bracketed –
“( jus universale et particulare)”, meaning – jus universale (universal law or jurisdiction); jus particulare (particular / local law or jurisdiction).
This concurs with the terms used on page 53 in Elements of ecclesiastical law (1895) of the section titled, ‘ART. II – Of American Canon Law, or of the National Canon Law of the United States’.
New Advent Encyclopedia endorsement at bottom of homepage, reads –
“The Editors take occasion on the appearance of this first volume to express their gratitude to all who have taken part with them in this enterprise; in particular to the hierarchy for their cordial endorsement…”

Have a nice and pleasurable time trying to sue the state with their own intellectual property.. This has been tried countless times all throughout this nation/states history starting as early as the Whiskey Rebellion.. All the way until now…

Hurry Scotty… You’re a slow fking learner but at least someday you’ll catch up with reality…

Meanwhile the circle jerk rolls on down the highway paved with good intentions…


A Psychological Meme On The Psychology Of The Modern Era Wolf Pimp

I bet if we used neuroscience, to better know the brains of pantheists who most often are psychopaths, a neurodevelopmental disorder, akin to autism, we’d then understand the pantheist wolf pimp mentality better. We know so much about the pathological psychopath mental state already, even reading these pantheists numerous comments advocating for wolves rights over mans rights and do a forensic analysis based on the psychopathy check list these disgusting comments they make in defense of wolves become self explanatory.. I see a need for more mental asylums in the U.S. and in Canada.. The Psychopathy Check List-Revised (PCL-R) was developed for researchers in 1980 and released publicly in 1991. It’s been the gold standard used by researchers ever since. Forensic clinicians and the justice system use it to identify the obvious hallmark traits and behaviors that make psychopaths chillingly unique. This research covers the ever growing population of ambulatory psychopaths as well, this is where the pantheist naturalist rights of trees dirt rocks even bugs are superior to mankind’s rights comes into recognition in the psychological world of this research. Thus wolf pimps can be a case study.. The term psychopath was coined in the mid- to late 1800s from its Greek roots psykhe and pathos, meaning “sick mind” or “suffering soul.” In that era, the condition was typically considered a type of moral insanity. An excellent book on the subject is The Mask of Sanity by psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley. The lack of empathy and callousness of the animals rights gurus speaks for itself.. In the case of the pantheist wolf pimp psychoanalysis perhaps using the method of semantic aphasia as an analogy could be useful. In semantic aphasia there is a loss of understanding of the meaning of words and terms, even though the pantheist wolf pimp subject can use words. Research professionals have used semantic aphasia to explain how psychopaths appear normal on the outside (the ‘Mask’) but inside have no comprehension of other people’s real experiences. This might explain why they claim wolf management rural advocates are not in touch with reality and obviously lie about everything , when in fact we’re telling them the truth.. This is certainly a fascinating research project I’m currently getting into… Essentially the psychology of scientism theories in relation to what pantheist wolf pimps are willing to believe meme is no less based on designing ‘experiments’ to test these ‘theories’ rather than simply advocating to enforce the theories, a ‘scientism theorist pantheist wolf pimp’ should be investigating and testing the assertions of these scientism narratives. And then also they should Psychoanalyze themselves__perhaps they can discover what makes THEM ALL tick?

Have a nice day psychos….


I Love It When The Truth Keeps Coming Together


The Status of the Law of Nations In Early American Law

It should be clear who a Nation/State belongs to and who it does not belong to…
[Sylvester, supra note 55, at 67; see also Stewart Jay, The Status of the Law of Nations in Early American Law, 42 VAND. L. REV. 819, 823 (1989) (“In ascertaining principles of the law of nations, lawyers and judges of that era relied heavily on continental treatise writers, Vattel being the most often consulted by Americans. An essential part of a sound legal education consisted of reading Vattel, Grotius, Pufendorf, and Burlamaqui, among others.”).]
Below is what Vattel and the Law of Nations has to say…
“The law of nations is the law of sovereigns. It is principally for them, and for their ministers, that it ought to be written. All mankind are indeed interested in it; and, in a free country, the study of its maxims is a proper employment for every citizen; but it would be of little consequence to impart the knowledge of it only to private individuals, who are not called to the councils of nations, and who have no influence in directing the public measures. If the conductors of slates, if all those who are employed in public affairs, condescended to apply seriously to the study of a science which ought to be their law, and, as it were, the compass by which to steer their course, what happy effects might we not expect from a good treatise on the law of nations! We every day feel the advantages of a good body of laws in civil society: — the law of nations is, in point of importance, as much superior to the civil law, as the proceedings of nations and sovereigns are more momentous in their consequences than those of private persons….”
“…But fatal experience too plainly proves how little regard those who are at the head of affairs pay to the dictates of justice, in conjunctures where they hope to find their advantage. Satisfied with bestowing their attention on a system of politics which is often false, since often unjust, the generality of them think they have done enough when they have thoroughly studied that. Nevertheless, we may truly apply to states a maxim which has long been acknowledged as true with respect to individuals, — that the best and safest policy is that which is founded on virtue. Cicero, as a great master in the art of government as in eloquence and philosophy, does not content himself with rejecting the vulgar maxim, that “a state cannot be happily governed without committing injustice;” he even proceeds so far as to lay down the very reverse of the proposition as an invariable truth, and maintains, that “without a strict attention to the most rigid justice, public affairs cannot be advantageously administered.”
Providence occasionally bestows on the world kings and ministers whose minds are impressed with this great truth. Let us not renounce the pleasing hope that the number of those wise conductors of nations will one day be multiplied; and in the interim let us, each in his own sphere, exert our best efforts to accelerate the happy period.”~[Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations]
From: The Law of Nations; Preliminaries: (This is what “States should be attain­ing” and this will give you a clue about what “all indi­vid­uals in a State” should be striv­ing for.)

§ 4. In what light nations or states are to be considered.

Nations being composed of men naturally free and independent, and who, before the establishment of civil societies, lived together in the state of nature, — Nations, or sovereign states, are to be considered as so many free persons living together in the state of nature.
It is a settled point with writers on the natural law, that all men inherit from nature a perfect liberty and independence, of which they cannot be deprived without their own consent. In a State, the individual citizens do not enjoy them fully and absolutely, because they have made a partial surrender of them to the sovereign. But the body of the nation, the State, remains absolutely free and independent with respect to all other men, and all other Nations, as long as it has not voluntarily submitted to them.

§ 10. Society established by nature between all mankind

Man is so formed by nature, that he cannot supply all his own wants, but necessarily stands in need of the intercourse and assistance of his fellow-creatures, whether for his immediate preservation, or for the sake of perfecting his nature, and enjoying such a life as is suitable to a rational being. This is sufficiently proved by experience. We have instances of persons, who, having grown up to manhood among the bears of the forest, enjoyed not the use of speech or of reason, but were, like the brute beasts, possessed only of sensitive faculties. We see moreover that nature has refused to bestow on men the same strength and natural weapons of defence with which she has furnished other animals — having, in lieu of those advantages, endowed mankind with the faculties of speech and reason, or at least a capability of acquiring them by an intercourse with their fellow-creatures. Speech enables them to communicate with each other, to give each other mutual assistance, to perfect their reason and knowledge; and having thus become intelligent, they find a thousand methods of preserving themselves, and supplying their wants. Each individual, moreover, is intimately conscious that he can neither live happily nor improve his nature without the intercourse and assistance of others. Since, therefore, nature has thus formed mankind, it is a convincing proof of her intention that they should communicate with, and mutually aid and assist each other.
Hence is deduced the establishment of natural society among men. The general law of that society is, that each individual should do for the others every thing which their necessities require, and which he can perform without neglecting the duty that he owes to himself: (4) a law which all men must observe in order to live in a manner consonant to their nature, and conformable to the views of their common Creator — a law which our own safety, our happiness, our dearest interests, ought to render sacred to every one of us. Such is the general obligation that binds us to the observance of our duties: let us fulfil them with care, if we would wisely endeavour to promote our own advantage. (5)

§ 14. Of the preservation and perfection of a nation.

He who no longer exists can have no duties to perform: and a moral being is charged with obligations to himself, only with a view to his perfection and happiness: for to preserve and to perfect his own nature, is the sum of all his duties to himself.
The preservation of a nation is found in what renders it capable of obtaining the end of civil society; and a nation is in a perfect state, when nothing necessary is wanting to arrive at that end. We know that the perfection of a thing consists, generally, in the perfect agreement of all its constituent parts to tend to the same end. A nation being a multitude of men united together in civil society — if in that multitude all conspire to attain the end proposed in forming a civil society, the nation is perfect; and it is more or less so, according as it approaches more or less to that perfect agreement. In the same manner its external state will be more or less perfect, according as it concurs with the interior perfection of the nation,
§ 21. A nation ought to perfect itself and the state.
The second general duty of a nation towards itself is to labour at its own perfection and that of its state. It is this double perfection that renders a nation capable of attaining the end of civil society: it would be absurd to unite in society, and yet not endeavour to promote the end of that union.
Here the entire body of a nation, and each individual citizen, are bound by a double obligation, the one immediately proceeding from nature, and the other resulting from their reciprocal engagements. Nature lays an obligation upon each man to labour after his own perfection; and in so doing, he labours after that of civil society, which could not fail to be very flourishing, were it composed of none but good citizens. But the individual finding in a well-regulated society the most powerful succours to enable him to fulfil the task which Nature imposes upon him in relation to himself, for becoming better, and consequently more happy — he is doubtless obliged to contribute all in his power to render that society more perfect.
All the citizens who form a political society reciprocally engage to advance the common welfare, and as far as possible to promote the advantage of each member. Since then the perfection of the society is what enables it to secure equally the happiness of the body and that of the members, the grand object of the engagements and duties of a citizen is to aim at this perfection, This is more particularly the duty of the body collective in all their common deliberations, and in everything they do as a body. (18)
End Law of Nations; Below Citizen defined..
Section 1; 14th Amendement;
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, AND SUBJECT to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”Definition of subject
1 :  one that is placed under authority or control: such asa :  vassalb (1) :  one subject to a monarch and governed by the monarch’s law (2) :  one who lives in the territory of, enjoys the protection of, and owes allegiance to a sovereign power or statesubject (v.)
late 14c., “to make (a person or nation) subject to another by force,” also “to render submissive or dependent,” from Medieval Latin subiectare “place beneath,” frequentative of Latin subicere “to make subject, subordinate” (see subject (n.)). Meaning “to lay open or expose to (some force or occurrence)” is recorded from early 15c. (implied in subjected). Related: Subjecting.
subject (n.)
early 14c., “person under control or dominion of another,” specifically a government or ruler, from Old French sogit, suget, subget “a subject person or thing” (12c., Modern French sujet), from noun use of Latin subiectus “lying under, below, near bordering on,” figuratively “subjected, subdued,” past participle of subicere, subiicere “to place under, throw under, bind under; to make subject, subordinate,” from sub “under” (see sub-) + combining form of iacere “to throw” (see jet (v.)). In 14c., sugges, sogetis, subgit, sugette; form re-Latinized in English 16c.

Meaning “person or thing regarded as recipient of action, one that may be acted upon” is recorded from 1590s. Grammatical sense is recorded from 1630s, from Latin subjectum “grammatical subject,” noun use of the neuter of the Latin past participle. Likewise some restricted uses in logic and philosophy are borrowed directly from Latin subjectum as “foundation or subject of a proposition,” a loan-translation of Aristotle’s to hypokeimenon. Meaning “subject matter of an art or science” is attested from 1540s, probably short for subject matter (late 14c.), which is from Medieval Latin subjecta materia, a loan translation of Greek hypokeimene hyle (Aristotle), literally “that which lies beneath.”

allegiance (n.)
“ties or obligations of a citizen or subject to a government or sovereign,” late 14c., formed in English from Anglo-French legaunce “loyalty of a liege-man to his lord,” from Old French legeance, from liege (see liege (adj.)). Corrupted in spelling by confusion with the now-obsolete legal term allegeance “alleviation, mitigation” (for which see allay (v.)). General figurative sense of “recognition of claims to respect or duty, observance of obligation” is attested from 1732. French allégeance in this sense is said to be from English.

liege (adj.)
c. 1300, of lords, “entitled to feudal allegiance and service,” from Anglo-French lige (late 13c.), Old French lige “liege-lord,” noun use of an adjective meaning “free, giving or receiving fidelity” (corresponding to Medieval Latin ligius, legius), a word of uncertain origin. Perhaps from Late Latin laeticus “cultivated by serfs,” from laetus “serf,” which probably is from Proto-Germanic *lethiga- “freed” (source also of Old English læt “half-freedman, serf;” Old High German laz, Old Frisian lethar “freedman;” Middle Dutch ledich “idle, unemployed”), from PIE root *le- (2) “let go, slacken” (see let (v.)). Or the Middle English word might be directly from Old High German leidig “free,” on the notion of “free from obligation to service except as vassal to one lord,” but this reverses the notion contained in the word.

From late 14c. of vassals, “bound to render feudal allegiance and service.” The dual sense of the adjective reflects the reciprocal relationship it describes: protection in exchange for service. Hence, liege-man “a vassal sworn to the service and support of a lord, who in turn is obliged to protect him” (mid-14c.).

word-forming element attached to verbs to form abstract nouns of process or fact (convergence from converge), or of state or quality (absence from absent); ultimately from Latin -antia and -entia, which depended on the vowel in the stem word, from PIE *-nt-, adjectival suffix.
Definition of -ance
1 :  action or process furtherance :  instance of an action or process performance
2 :  quality or state :  instance of a quality or state protuberance
3 :  amount or degree conductance

I can keep going with this.. Corpus Juris Secundem Citizen defined backs this up also..

Interesting how they established freedom by enslaving everyone else…