Inns of Court London

Posts to introduce yourself to the Matrixfiles Forum, and posts that don't fall under any of the other topics or categories.
Forum rules
This forum is for those that want to learn, flourish and prosper. As such certain rules need to be laid down. Those who join just to promote spam, advertising, other services, systems, forums, etc, will be permanently banned and there will be no second chances. You will be expected to have consideration for the experiences and opinions of other forum members. Each individual has their own truth and inhabit their own Universe as well as the physical Universe we all live in. So invalidation (i.e. ‘you’re wrong…’ ‘that’s not true…’ ‘that’s bullshit…..’ etc), of others will be met with one warning after which you will be moderated or permanently banned at admin’s discretion. If someone is incorrect provide proofs and links to your contrary viewpoint, if any. This is to be a forum where people meet to grow and exchange information to better themselves and the world they live in. So I would like everyone who becomes part of this forum to get this right at the beginning and to act accordingly. All information in these forums is shared with the agreement that you take FULL responsibility for using any of the information provided if you so choose to do so. You are responsible for your own actions and experiences. No one else.

Inns of Court London

Unread postby Anglo-Saxon » Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:52 pm

Definitions

INNS of COURT. by Anglo-Saxon


Once of http://www.Tpuc.org/forum though booted off by Ben thats right Ben like others dispatched a poster of over 4 years never allowed to return since November 2013 same time as Freeman Stephen and probably others left. Well Ben your reputation has followed you to SSOTL in Scotland.

And now to continue to INNS of Court


These are certain private unincorporated associations, in the nature of collegiate houses, located in London, and invested with the exclusive privilege of calling men to the bar; that is, conferring the rank or degree of a barrister. They were founded probably about the beginning of the fourteenth century. The principal inns of court are the Inner Temple, Middle Temple, Lincoln’s Inn, and Gray’s Inn. (The two former originally belonged to the Knights Templar; the two latter to the earls of Lincoln and Gray respectively.) These bodies now have a “common council of legal education,” for giving lectures and holding examinations. The inns of chancery, distinguishable from the foregoing, but generally classed with them under the general name, are the buildings known as “Clifford’s Inn,” “Clement’s Inn,” “New Inn,” “Staples’ Inn,” and “Barnard’s Inn.” They were formerly a sort of collegiate houses in which law students learned the elements of law before being admitted into the inns of court, but they have long ceased to occupy that position. - Black’s Law Dictionary, First Edition, West Publishing Company (1891), The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. Edition, reprinted 1991, page 626 [some emphasis added by Editor]

Time marches on, so changes were required for a later edition of Black’s.
Inns of Court. These are certain private unincorporated associations, in the nature of collegiate houses, located in London, and invested with the exclusive privilege of calling people to the bar; that is, conferring the rank or degree of a barrister. They were founded probably about the beginning of the fourteenth century. The principal inns of court are the Inner Temple, Middle Temple, Lincoln’s Inn, and Gray’s Inn. (The two former originally belonged to the Knights Templar; the two latter to the earls of Lincoln and Gray respectively.) These bodies now have a “common council of legal education,” for giving lectures and holding examinations. The inns of chancery, distinguishable from the foregoing, but generally classed with them under the general name, are the buildings known as “Clifford’s Inn,” “Clement’s Inn,” “New Inn,” “Staples’ Inn,” and “Barnard’s Inn.” They were formerly a sort of collegiate houses in which law students learned the elements of law before being admitted into the inns of court, but they have long ceased to occupy that position. The Inns of Court (governed by officers called “benches”) hold the exclusive privilege of conferring the degree of barrister-at-law which is required to practice as an advocate or counsel in the superior courts. -- Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (Centennial Edition), West Publishing Company (1990) [some emphasis added by Editor]

There are certain key words and phrases in the first (1891) definition that are emphasized in bold and/or italics. This formatting was added to draw attention to the word or phrase so one may more easily assess the context in which the word or phrase is used. The only word that was changed in the 1990 edition of Black’s Law Dictionary is the concession to political correctness by substitution of the word “people” for “men.” The other change is the addition of the final sentence.
The words and phrases in the 1891 edition that we must immediately bring into clear focus before understanding the nature of the Inns of Court are:

1. Private
2. Unincorporated
3. Associations
4. Located in London
5. Invested
6. Exclusive
7. Privilege
8. Calling
9. Bar
10. Rank or degree
11. Barrister

And in the additional sentence in the 1990 edition, we need to look at:

1. Governed
2. Officers
3. Benches
4. Conferring
5. Degree
6. Barrister-at-law
7. Required
8. Practice
9. Advocate
10. Counsel
11. Superior courts

You need to read all of these definitions that you can find, and if you can’t find an official definition, then spend some time thinking about why the authors of this bastion of legal lexicons used that particular word or grouping of words when describing four private associations located in London.
As briefly as I can, I will give some general definitions that fit the circumstances.

Private” means non-governmental, and while it does not mean the same as “secret,” a private association is under no obligation to volunteer any information about itself to people outside of that association.

Unincorporated” means that the association is not created by government, and therefore not under any kind of government control or regulation.
“Association” means that they have the right to freely associate, and if the group were in America instead of in London, their organization would be under the protection of the first amendment.

“Located in London” is comforting. After all, Americans would not want to have a court system that was not under the control of the people any more than they would want a military that makes its own rules and identifies its own targets. Aren’t you glad that in the 100 years since the first Black’s Law Dictionary was published, the publisher has not found it necessary to add that there are Inns of Court controlling the American courts?

Invested” is not defined in Black’s, but in this case it has nothing to do with finances. In this case, it is the past tense of the word “vest” with the prefix meaning something on the order of “empowered with.” Black’s dictionary defines “vest” as; “To give an immediate, fixed right of present or future enjoyment. Baldwin v. Fleck, Tex.Civ.App., 168 S.W.2nd 904,909. To accrue to; to be fixed; to take effect.” So the Inns of court have the exclusive RIGHT of doing what they do. The government cannot interfere with their power over the British judicial system. Further, when we look at the term “vested rights,” we see that this class of rights are not subject to be defeated or canceled by the act of any other private person, and which is right and equitable that the government should recognize and protect, as being lawful in themselves, and settled according to the then current rules of law, and so forth. The government, therefore, must protect the vested rights of the inns of court, and enforce a private association’s control over the entire system of justice.

Exclusive” is appertaining to the subject alone, not including, admitting, or pertaining to any others. Sole. Shutting out/ debarring from interference or participation; vested in one person alone. It is interesting that we find a derivative of two of the other words on our list right here! In short, exclusive means that the government is barred from any interference in selecting lawyers. Governments may rubber-stamp the approval, if they wish, but they may not participate in the selection or calling process. Under “exclusive right,” we find that an exclusive right is one which only the grantee thereof can exercise, and from which all other are prohibited or shut out.

Privilege” Various forms of this word take up over six columns in Black’s 5th edition. Essentially, “privilege” means a particular or peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by a person, company, or class, beyond the common advantages of other citizens. An exceptional or extraordinary power or exemption. A right, power or immunity held by a person or class, against or beyond the course of the law. I am sure that most Americans would at least give verbal assurances that all should be equal before the law. A privileged class is NOT equal before the law, as they have additional rights and immunities.

Calling to the bar” is again defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as applying to the English system of law. It says “In English practice, conferring the dignity or degree of barrister-at-law upon a member of one of the inns of court.” This is a classic case of the bad practice of using a word or phrase to define itself, however, we do see that the inns of court are empowered with the ability of creating a certain class of noblemen.

Rank” means one’s position in society. Rank is used upon occasion for designating something other than office, and in these cases “rank” is used for designation or title of honour, dignity, or distinction conferred upon an officer in order to fix his relative position in reference to other officers in matters of privilege, precedence, and sometimes of command, or by which to determine his pay and emoluments. In other words, one’s rank is one’s relative position within the same general class or title.

Degree” has several interesting definitions, but the two that are most interesting, regarding Inns of Court and Titles of Nobility, are: 1) the title conferred on graduates of school, college, or university, and 2) the grade or distance one thing may be removed from another; i.e., the distance, or number of removes, which separates two persons who are related by consanguinity. Thus we speak of a brother as being in the second degree of kindred.

Barrister” In England, an advocate; a counsellor learned in the law who has been admitted to plead at the bar, and who is engaged in conducting the trial or argument of causes. A person called to the bar by the benches of the Inns of Court, giving exclusive right of audience in the Supreme Court. (I didn’t know that England HAD a Supreme Court!) I know that they have courts of chancery, bankruptcy, exchequer, admiralty, and so forth, but that is a new one on me. It could not possibly be that there are actually Barristers and Inns of Court members, and specially privileged Noblemen running around in America without the expressed permission of congress, could it?

Governed” No entry, but for Govern, on page 478 of Black’s Sixth edition, we find: “To direct and control the actions or conduct of, either by established laws or by arbitrary will; to direct and control, rule, or regulate, by authority. To be a rule, precedent, law or deciding principle for.”

Officers” – of the many kinds and definitions, the most pertinent are: “Person holding officer of trust, command or authority in corporation, government, armed services, or other institution or organization.” And “In corporations, a person charged with important functions of management such as president, vice president, treasurer, etc.”

Bench” pg. 107 of Black’s Sixth edition: “A seat of judgment or tribunal for the administration of justice. The seat occupied by judges in courts. Also, the court itself, or the aggregate of the judges composing a court, as in the phrase “before the full bench.” Compare Bar.”
also:
“The judges taken collectively, as distinguished from counsellors and advocates, who are called the bar.”
also:
“The term, indicating originally the seat of the judges, came to denote the body of judges taken collectively, and also the tribunal itself, as the King’s Bench.” [Are you getting the picture?]
also of interest:
Bench legislation; Bench Mark, Bench trial, Bench warrant.

Bench legislation: see judge-made law “A phrase used to indicate judicial decisions which construe away the meaning of statutes, or find meanings in them the legislature never intended. It is perhaps more commonly used as meaning, simply, the law established by judicial precedent and decisions. Laws having their source in judicial decisions as opposed to laws having their source in statutes or administrative regulations.” Black’s Sixth edition, Pg. 585 & 586

Degree” “Extent, measure or scope of an action, condition or regulation. Legal extent of guilt or negligence. Title conferred on graduates of school, college, or university. The state or civil condition of a person.
“The grade or distance one thing may be removed from another; i.e., the distance, or number of removes, which separates two persons who are related by consanguinity. Thus we speak of a brother as being in the second degree of kindred.”

Barrister” “In England, an advocate; a counsellor learned in the law who has been admitted to plead at the bar, and who is engaged in conducting the trial or argument of causes. A person called to the bar by the benchers of the Inns of Court, giving exclusive rights of audience in the Supreme Court.

Require” “To direct, order, demand, instruct, command, claim, compel, request, need, exact. To be in need of. To ask for authoritatively or imperatively.”

Practice” “Repeated or customary action; habitual performance; a succession of acts of similar kind; custom; usage. Application of science to the wants of men. The exercise of any profession.
“The form or mode or proceeding in courts of justice for the enforcement of rights or the redress of wrongs, as distinguished from the substantive law which gives the right or denounces the wrong. The form, manner, or order of instituting and conducting an action or other judicial proceeding, through its successive stages to its end, in accordance with the rules and principles laid down by law or by the regulations and precedents of the courts. The term applies as well to the conduct of criminal as to civil actions, to proceedings in equity as well as at law, and to the defense as well as the prosecution of any proceeding.”

Practice of law” “The rendition of services requiring the knowledge and the application of legal principles and technique to serve the interests of another with his consent. It is not limited to appearing in court, or advising and performing of services in the conduct of the various shapes of litigation, but embraces the preparation of pleadings, and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, and in larger sense includes legal advice and counsel and preparation of legal instruments by which legal rights and obligations are established. A person engages in the “practice of law” by maintaining an office where is held out to be an attorney, using a letterhead describing himself as an attorney, counseling clients in legal matters, negotiating with opposing counsel about pending litigation, and fixing a collecting fees for services rendered by his associate.”

Advocate” “One who assists, defends, or pleads for another. One who renders legal advice and aid and pleads the cause of another before a court or a tribunal, a counselor. A person learned in the law, and duly admitted to practice, who assists his client with advice, and pleads for him in open court. An assistant; adviser, a pleader of causes.”

Counsel” “Attorney or counsellor (q.v.) “Advice and assistance given by one person to another in regard to a legal matter, proposed line of conduct, claim, or contention.
“The words “counsel” and “advise” may be, and frequently are, used in criminal law to describe the offense of a person who, not actually doing the felonious act, by his will contributed to it or procured it to be done.”

Counsellor” “An attorney: lawyer. Member of the legal profession who gives legal advice and handles the legal affairs of client, including, if necessary, appearing on his or her behalf in civil, criminal, or administrative actions and proceedings.”

Superior courts” “Courts of general or extensive jurisdiction, as distinguished from the inferior courts. As the official style of a tribunal, the term “ superior court” bears a different meaning in different states. In some it is a court of intermediate jurisdiction between the trial courts and the chief appellate court; elsewhere it is the designation of the trail courts.”
…and from sources OTHER than Black’s Law Dictionary:
Nobility is defined as “1: the quality or state of being noble in character, quality or rank. 2: the body of persons forming the noble class in a country or state: ARISTOCRACY.”
Aristocracy is defined as “1: government by the best individuals or a small privileged class... 3: a governing body or upper class usually made up of a hereditary nobility.”
I always find it interesting when a word is used to define itself………
The “Inns of Court” obviously refers to a collection of very powerful and influential people. Like a good newspaper reporter in days gone by, let us discover: Who are they? What are they? When did they exist? Where do they live and work? Why are they important today?

Who are the Inns of Court?

They are the associations that select ALL of the people who practice law in all of the higher courts in the land, including the judges and magistrates. Because they possess this exclusive power, this means that they have the power of controlling the way that the laws are interpreted. By controlling the way in which the laws are interpreted, the Inns of Court have the entire wealth of the nation in their grasp.

What are the Inns of Court? They are private associations. Private, in this sense, means not a publicly controlled entity. Being private, and not under the control of the government, this means that no one, I mean NO ONE, votes for the Inns of Court. Also, this means that the people of any nation that has Inns of Court have absolutely no control over the system of justice in their country. Don’t you breathe a big sigh of relief when you read that the Inns of Court are located in London. We, as Free Sovereigns on the Soil of America, certainly would want to retain control over the courts in our own country.

When did/do the Inns of Court operate? Finally, we have a simple question with a simple answer. The Inns of Court began in England in the mid fourteenth century, and have operated continuously in America between the day that the first British Esquire stepped foot on American soil and the present day. This does not mean that there has been an “Inn” on American soil, only that the Barristers and Benches have been in control of the American legal system since before the Constitution of 1787 was written. The Inns of Court members are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence where it says that “He has sent hither swarms of officers to harass out people and eat out their substance.”

Where are the inns of court? Black’s Law Dictionary, one hundred years ago and today, informs us that they are located in London. In one hundred years, West Publishing Company, the publisher of Black’s Law Dictionary has not found any reason to change the definition of “Inns of Court” to expand the area of operations of the Inns of Court outside of the confines of the City of London. This is a lullaby to Americans. Having a popular legal publishing house like West assuring us by their omission of America as an A. O. (Area of Operations) for the Inns of Court allows us to think that we still have control of the system of Justice as well as the way that the laws are interpreted. As we discover by examining the last several pages of our Black’s Law Dictionaries, West Publishing Company bases their chain of authority in the British Monarchy, not the constitution or Declaration of Independence from Great Britain.

If the reader has access to the internet, go to a good search engine and look up how many times “Inns of Court” are mentioned in web sites. When I looked up Inns of Court using the Alta Vista search engine, I found many files on Inns of Court. One of the files talked about a big, week-long celebration in England in July of the year 2000. This was a joint meeting between the British Inns of Court and the American Bar Association. Further, there were web sites that give the addresses and contact information of all of the known Inns of Court in America. One web site even has an application for membership published on its page.

Any time I see the word “exclusive,” I pay attention. Both the first and second of the Ten Commandments demand that we recognize God as the EXCLUSIVE ruler of the universe. The U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, clauses 17 & 18 grant EXCLUSIVE lawmaking power to congress, making them unaccountable to anyone other than themselves for their own deeds and [legislative] acts. and there appears to be only one meaning for the word “exclusive.” In the case of the Inns of Court, when a private, anonymous group of people is recognized as having an exclusive privilege, this amounts to a title of nobility.

Title,” according to the second sentence of the definition of that word in Black’s fifth edition, regarding the law of persons, title means “… a title is an appellation of dignity or distinction, a name denoting the social rank of the person bearing it; as “duke” or “count.” Please note that this word is not limited in any way to these two aristocratic titles, they are merely used as convenient examples. “Title” means virtually any appellation that distinguishes the social rank. “Esquire” conforms with this definition quite as well.

Nobility,” in English law, is a division of the people, comprehending dukes, marquises, earls, viscounts, and Barons. These had anciently duties annexed to their respective honours. They are created either by writ, that is, by royal summons to attend the house of peers, or by letters patent, that is, by royal grant of any dignity and degree of peerage; and they enjoy many privileges, exclusive of their senatorial capacity. The complete list of nobles is a bit longer, when one includes all of those titles with which special privileges are concurred. The lowest on the list, is [i]Esquire, which ranks next above a gentleman (land-owner).[/i]

The founders of America had first-hand experience with a system that had exclusive control over the legal system by the British Inns of Court, and attempted a blockage of that control in America with the inclusion in the constitution of the “no title of nobility” provision in Article 1 section 10. The problem was that the provision had absolutely NO enforcement provisions or penalties. When the Americans saw that the constitution was being freely ignored by the Esquires, they sought an amendment (the thirteenth amendment) that would eventually be called the “Titles of Nobility Amendment.” The full text of that amendment, as finally ratified in 1819 by the state of Virginia, and published by order of the Virginia state legislature, is:

“If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honor, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any: present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them .” :o

This amendment was duly ratified by a sufficient number of states that it became law in 1819. The author has seen certified copies of this amendment that were published by the Illinois government in 1833 and 1839. The amendment was published under federal direction and with federal funding in the territory of Colorado. The amendment was published in many states, even the ones where the amendment was not ratified.

The new amendment put real teeth in the constitutional ban against Titles of Nobility. Can we, today, imagine what it would be like to have a government without special privileges for lawyers, judges, congressmen, bureaucrats, and presidents? That kind of country would have been great! Worth fighting for, even. Is it not a title of nobility to be able to be able to rape, pillage, and murder and be above the reach of the arms of justice? Does not every county and city have its own well-known stories of lawyers and bureaucrats being beyond the reach of justice? There is no new thing under the sun, and these are the very conditions described in Ecclesiastes 5:8, which says, “If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest regardeth, and there be higher than they.” In modern American-English, this means that we are not to regard it as unusual when the poor are oppressed by the government, and higher bureaucrat protect the lower bureaucrats, and the highest bureaucrats protect even them. When we consider the Thirteenth amendment and the definitions of Nobility and Privilege, the early Americans were quite obviously trying to eliminate the potential (and reality) of these miscarriages of justice by the American government.

The amendment disappeared sometime after the [un]civil war. In 1871, the U.S. congress enacted the Washington D.C. Organic Act, creating a corporation behind which the legislators could hide for their illegal activities during and after that war. One of the illegal activities was the taking of patented land away from the owners and giving the land to Union war veterans. When congress created the corporation, they apparently adopted the form and color of the original government as their business plan. When they adopted the constitution as their articles of incorporation, it was a rather simple matter to merely drop the Titles of Nobility Amendment and “de-increment” all of the other amendments by one. Thus, the 14th amendment, known as the “No Involuntary Servitude Amendment” has after that time, been known as the “thirteenth amendment.” We have an example of this manipulation of amendment numbers in the Constitution as published in Colorado Territory before and after 1871.
We also have evidence, in the decision rendered by the supreme Court in the “Slaughterhouse Cases,” that what used to be known as the 14th amendment before the [un]civil war was now known as the 13th amendment after 1871. The decision in the Slaughterhouse cases clearly supports the allegation that the Titles of Nobility amendment was occupying the position of thirteenth amendment, because the court placed the anti-slavery amendment in the 14th amendment place.

The esquires and other noblemen created in America by the Inns of Court began using their positions of power to hide the evidence of the Titles of Nobility amendment. After a long, bloody, uncivil war, and a still-to-be-ended suspension of the right of Habeas Corpus and establishment of Martial Law under Abraham Lincoln, the Aristocrats had sufficient power to re-take the control of the government. As long as the real control was firmly in the hands of the British aristocrats, they would be able to wait another 50 years before they made any more overt movements to gain control of their wayward colonies. Total control would be more than 100 years away.
With the advent of the United Nations (on American soil) which is controlled by the Bank of England “front” organization called the International Monetary Fund, the American government and the soil are both returned under the dominion of the Royal Crown of England. The bulk of the American people had been returning to British control one at a time, with the seeking of benefits of the Crown by accepting the Social Security Numbers and the cradle-to-the-grave security of slavery. :) :o ..... :lol:

Americans now are in the same position as our forefathers were in 225 years ago. Americans are under the financial, governmental, legal, and spiritual thumb of the very nobility from who’s slavery we sought to free ourselves in 1776. Truly, “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.” [Ecclesiastes 1:9]

In the eighteenth verse of the eighth chapter of First Samuel, the Bible tells us what we can expect as a result of the disobedience of trying to govern ourselves, with our own rulers, and our own laws. We cannot work within a system that we did not design or create, and restore that system or reform that system into something that the system was never designed to be. We cannot find safety in obedience under a legal system that was designed for the benefit of despots. We know that the book of Revelation, chapter 18, verse 4 commands us to “Come out of her, my people” and tells us that our only protection against the self-destructive plagues that are coming upon participants in that system is to obediently “come out.” We know both sides now, because in answering the other standard “reporter’s questions,” we also answered the question, “Why are the Inns of Court important today?” It is important that we understand the “Inns of Court” because we finally understand how Great Britain has been ruling this nation for over two hundred years. They have been using the courts to bend and mold public policy in such a way that Americans will not see any reason NOT to trust the benevolence of Great Britain as our ruler, once again.

History has shown that the British Aristocrats do not make benevolent rulers. They are as savage and ruthless as any that have ever been on the face of this earth. :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
The only real question that remains before us, is: “How can we use this information to protect ourselves, our friends, and our families?”





[The extension docx has been deactivated and can no longer be displayed.]

The Most illuminating Video ever ever made
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuzkLbHb1Q8

And why Putin is now kicking off.
Anglo-Saxon
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:36 pm

Re: Inns of Court London

Unread postby judgedredd » Wed Mar 19, 2014 8:29 pm

Thanks for the info. Good stuff.
User avatar
judgedredd
Site Admin
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 11:38 pm


Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron