TODAY EQUITY LAW
IS USED TO VEST POWER IN THE JUDGES
AND STATE THAT THE CONSTITUTION NEVER
GRANTS ANY GOVERNMENT. The SJC had
exclusive jurisdiction of divorce
and custody cases until 1889, it did
not get equity jurisdiction till 1877.
The government was initially making
Common Law determinations when implementing
natural rights (the Blackstone quote
regarding natural law being equivalent
to God's Divine Will) during divorce
and custody hearings were doing so
under the Common Law. Even the 'Tender
Years' was based on a re-interpretation
of nature's laws in a Common Law jurisdiction.
The once blind obedience to natural
law decision based on immutable and
unalienable natural rights has been
transformed into blind obedience to
the state. This unlawful conversion
from law to equity means that unless
the state is willing revert back to
natural law, the state must provide
some at law remedy such as a trial
by jury regarding these issues and
not convert to equity. Wrong venue
and/or jurisdiction means the judges
do not have immunity.
How drastically different
our current system of Family Law is
from when it was initially constructed.
It has changed so much that at law
precedence claims regarding no right
to a trial by jury, cannot be made
under today's equity determination
since the state was implementing the
natural law; i.e., God's Will (per
Blackstone), and no one at that time
questioned God's Will; also they were
made at law and are distinguishable
and are not relevant in current divorce
and custody cases done under equity
jurisdiction. Let's review the chronology
of events.
The Federalist and Anti-Federalist
Paper debated the corrupt use of equity
determination to circumvent the rule
of law. As a result here in America,
equity cannot act when there is full
and complete remedy at law and the
government cannot convert those things
that had been done AT LAW at the signing
of the Constitution into equity. The
Anti-Federalists were concerned that
the oppression and injustice similar
to the Tutor 'Star Chamber' and 'Privy
Counsil' would repeat itself.
The legislature in Massachusetts (prior
to the signing of the state Constitution),
and the executive branch (subsequent
to signing the state Constitution),
had to be petitioned for a divorce.
It was not until 1785 (Statutes 1785,
Chapter 69) in Massachusetts that
the State Supreme Judicial Court (SJC)
was given EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction over
divorce and custody cases (because,
in part, the cost imposed upon a citizen
in traveling to Boston and the workload
on the Governor). It is important
to note that it was not until 1877
(Statutes 1877, Chapter 178) that
the SJC was given equity jurisdiction.
In 1889, Superior Court was given
jurisdiction (Statutes 1889, Chapter
332). And in 1922, Probate Court was
given jurisdiction (Acts 1922, Chapter
542).
Subsequently, we see in Commonwealth
v. Briggs, 33 Mass. 203 (1834), that
child custody was not an action in
equity. Briggs clearly shows that
the action was Natural/Common Lawrights,
not equity. No input from the body
politic at all. To re-inforce just
how simple divorce and custody issues
are, note that one of the main reasons
for the transfer from the the governor
to the SJC in the statutes of 1785
was the cost of traveling to Boston.
Imagine the trip to Boston being the
largest financial concern in a divorce.
Now the government, a natural rights
based, Lockean, Natural Law social
compact per the Massachusetts Constitution,
has converted these sacred rights
to equity determination based on a
Bolshevik jurisprudence model that
says the state is not the servant
of the people but the master of the
people. These act, in effect, makes
war against both the state and Federal
Constitutions; the very definition
of treason. The once blind obedience
to God's Divine Will is transformed
into blind obedience to the state.
A despotic, oligarchic, Krytrocracy
where fraud, treason, and unenlightened
judicial self-interest have become
the rule of law.
|