Advanced Civics Research Library
Structure Of The Birth Certificate
Did the State Pledge Your Body to a Bank?
Right: Some birth and marriage certificates are now "warehouse receipts," printed on banknote paper, which may mark
you and yours as 'chattel' property of the banks that our government borrows from every day.
By: David Deschesne
Editor, Fort Fairfield Journal
Fort Fairfield Journal, May 11, 2005
A certificate is a "paper establishing an ownership claim." - Barron's Dictionary of
Banking Terms. Registration of births began in 1915, by the Bureau of Census, with all
states adopting the practice by 1933.
Birth and marriage certificates are a form of securities called "warehouse receipts." The
items included on a warehouse receipt, as descried at §7-202 of the Uniform Commercial
Code, the law which governs commercial paper and transactions, which parallel a birth or
marriage certificate are:
-the location of the warehouse where the goods are stored...(residence)
-the date of issue of the receipt.....("Date issued")
-the consecutive number of the receipt...(found on back or front of the certificate, usually in red numbers)
-a description of the goods or of the packages containing them...(name, sex, date of birth, etc.)
-the signature of the warehouseman, which may be made by his authorized agent...(municipal clerk or state
registrar's signature)
Birth/marriage certificates now appear to at least qualify as "warehouse receipts" under
the Uniform Commercial Code. Black's Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition, defines:
warehouse receipt. "...A warehouse receipt, which is considered a document of
title, may be a negotiable instrument and is often used for financing with
inventory as security."
Since the U.S. went bankrupt in 1933, all new money has to be borrowed into existence.
All states started issuing serial-numbered, certificated "warehouse receipts" for births and
marriages in order to pledge us as collateral against those loans and municipal bonds
taken out with the Federal Reserve's banks. The "Full faith and Credit" of the American
people is said to be that which back the nation's debt. That simply means the American
people's ability to labor and pay back that debt. In order to catalog its laborers, the
Structure of the Birth Certificate
1
government needed an efficient, methodical system of tracking its property to that end.
Humans today are looked upon merely as resources - "human resources" that is.
Governmental assignment of a dollar value to the heads of citizens began on July 14,
1862 when President Lincoln offered 6 percent interest bearing-bonds to states who freed
their slaves on a "per head" basis. This practice of valuating humans (cattle?) continues
today with our current system of debt-based currency reliant upon a steady stream of
fresh new chattels to back it.
Additional Birth Certificate Research
Federal Children
by Joyce Rosenwald
In 1921, the federal Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act created the birth "registration" or
what we now know as the "birth certificate." It was known as the "Maternity Act" and
was sold to the American people as a law that would reduce maternal and infant
mortality, protect the health of mothers and infants, and for "other purposes." One of
those other purposes provided for the establishment of a federal bureau designed to
cooperate with state agencies in the overseeing of its operations and expenditures. What it
really did was create a federal birth registry which exists today, creating "federal
children." This government, under the doctrine of "Parens Patriae" now legislates for
American children as if they are owned by the federal government. Through the public
school enrollment process and continuing license requirements for most aspects of daily
life, these children grow up to be adults indoctrinated into the process of asking for
"permission" from ‘big Daddy’ government to do all those things necessary to carry out
daily activities that exist in what is called a "free country."
Before 1921 the records of births and names of children were entered into family bibles,
as were the records of marriages and deaths. These records were readily accepted by both
the family and the law as "official" records. Since 1921 the American people have been
registering the births and names of their children with the government of the state in
which they are born, even though there is no federal law requiring it. The state tells you
that registering your child's birth through the birth certificate serves as proof that he/she
was born in the united States, thereby making him/her a United States Citizen. For the
past several years a social security number has been mandated by the federal government
to be issued at birth.
In 1933, bankruptcy was declared by President Roosevelt. The governors of the then 48
States pledged the "full faith and credit" of their states, including the citizenry, as
collateral for loans of credit from the Federal Reserve System. To wit: "Full faith and
credit" clause of Const. U.S. article 4. sec. 1 requires that foreign judgment be given such
faith and credit as it had by law or usage of state of its origin. That foreign statutes are to
have force and effect to which they are entitled in home state. And that a judgment or
record shall have the same faith, credit, conclusive effect, and obligatory force in other
states as it has by law or usage in the state from whence taken. Black's Law Dictionary,
Fourth Edition cites omitted.
Structure of the Birth Certificate
2
The state claims an interest in every child within its jurisdiction. The state (via CPS) will,
if it deems it necessary, nullify your parental rights and appoint a guardian (trustee) over
your children. The subject of every birth certificate is a child. The child is a valuable
asset, which if properly trained, can contribute valuable assets provided by its labor for
many years. It is presumed by those who have researched this issue, that the child itself is
the asset of the trust established by the birth certificate, and the social security number is
the numbering or registration of the trust, allowing for the assets of the trust to be tracked.
If this information is true, your child is now owned by the state. Each one of us, including
our children, are considered assets of the bankrupt UNITED STATES. We are now
designated by this government as "HUMAN RESOURCES" with a new crop born every
year.
In 1923, a suit was brought against federal officials charged with the administration of
the maternity act, who were citizens of another state, to enjoin them from enforcing it,
wherein the plaintiff averred that the act was unconstitutional, and that it's purpose was to
induce the States to yield sovereign rights reserved by them through the federal
Constitution's 10th amendment and not granted to the federal government, and that the
burden of the appropriations falls unequally upon the several States, held, that, as the
statute does not require the plaintiff to do or yield anything, and as no burden is imposed
by it other than that of taxation, which falls, not on the State but on her inhabitants, who
are within the federal as well as the state taxing power, the complaint resolves down to
the naked contention that Congress has usurped reserved powers of the States by the mere
enactment of the statute, though nothing has been, or is to be, done under it without their
consent (Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.;
Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury et. al..) Mr. Alexander Lincoln,
Assistant Attorney General, argued for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. To wit:
I. The act is unconstitutional. It purports to vest in agencies of the Federal Government
powers which are almost wholly undefined, in matters relating to maternity and infancy,
and to authorize appropriations of federal funds for the purposes of the act.
Many examples may be given and were stated in the debates on the bill in Congress of
regulations which may be imposed under the act. THE FORCED REGISTRATION OF
PREGNANCY, GOVERNMENTAL PRENATAL EXAMINATION OF EXPECTANT
MOTHERS, RESTRICTIONS ON THE RIGHT OF A WOMAN TO SECURE THE
SERVICES OF A MIDWIFE OR PHYSICIAN OF HER OWN SELECTION, are
measures to which the people of those States which accept its provisions may be
subjected. There is nothing which prohibits the payment of subsidies out of federal
appropriations. INSURANCE OF MOTHERS MAY BE MADE COMPULSORY. THE
TEACHING OF BIRTH CONTROL AND PHYSICAL INSPECTION OF PERSONS
ABOUT TO MARRY MAY BE REQUIRED.
By section 4 of the act, the Children's Bureau is given all necessary powers to cooperate
with the state agencies in the administration of the act. Hence it is given the power to
assist in the enforcement of the plans submitted to it, and for that purpose by its agents to
go into the several States and to do those acts for which the plans submitted may provide.
As to what those plans shall provide, the final arbiters are the Bureau and the Board. THE
FACT THAT IT WAS CONSIDERED NECESSARY IN EXPLICIT TERMS TO
PRESERVE FROM INVASION BY FEDERAL OFFICIALS THE RIGHT OF THE
Structure of the Birth Certificate
3
PARENT TO THE CUSTODY AND CARE OF HIS CHILD AND THE SANCTITY OF
HIS HOME SHOWS HOW FAR REACHING ARE THE POWERS WHICH WERE
INTENDED TO BE GRANTED BY THE ACT.
(1) The act is invalid because it assumes powers not granted to Congress and usurps the
local police power. McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 405; United States v.
Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 549-551.
In more recent cases, however, the Court has shown that there are limits to the power of
Congress to pass legislation purporting to be based on one of the powers expressly
granted to Congress which in fact usurps the reserved powers of the States, and that laws
showing on their face detailed regulation of a matter wholly within the police power of
the States will be held to be unconstitutional although they purport to be passed in the
exercise of some constitutional power. Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251; Child Labor
Tax Case, 259 U.S. 20; Hill v. Wallace, 259 U.S. 44.
The act is not made valid by the circumstance that federal powers are to be exercised only
with respect to those States which accept the act, for Congress cannot assume, and state
legislatures cannot yield, the powers reserved to the States by the Constitution. Message
of President Monroe, May 4, 1822; 4 Elliot's Debates, p. 525; Pollard's Lessee v. Hagan,
3 How. 212; Escanaba Co. v. Chicago, 107 U.S. 678; Coyle v. Oklahoma, 221 U.S. 559;
Cincinnati v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 223 U.S. 390.
(2) The act is invalid because it imposes on each State an illegal option either to yield a
part of its powers reserved by the Tenth Amendment or to give up its share of
appropriations under the act. A statute attempting, by imposing conditions upon a general
privilege, to exact a waiver of a constitutional right, is null and void. Harrison v. St.
Louis & San Francisco R.R. Co., 232 U.S. 318; Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257
U.S. 529.
(3) The act is invalid because it sets up a system of government by cooperation between
the Federal Government and certain of the States, not provided by the Constitution.
Congress cannot make laws for the States, and it cannot delegate to the States the power
to make laws for the United States . In re Rahrer, 140 U.S. 545; Knickerbocker Ice Co. v.
Stewart, 253 U.S. 149; Opinion of the Justices, 239 Mass. 606.
The Maternity Act was eventually repealed, but parts of it have been found in other
legislative acts. What this act attempted to do was set up government by appointment, run
by bureaucrats with re-delegated authority to tax, which is in itself unconstitutional. What
was once declared as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of this nation in the past
should be upheld in a court challenge today. The constitution hasn't changed. What has
changed is the way this government views human life. Today we are defined as human
resources, believed to be owned by government. The government now wants us, as
individuals, to be tagged and tracked. Government mandated or legislated National I.D. is
unconstitutional anyway you look at it. Federal jurisdiction to legislate for the several
states does not exist and could never survive a court challenge as shown above. Writing
letters to elected public servants won't save us when we all know their agenda does not
include serving those who placed them in power. Perhaps the 10th amendment of the
federal constitution guaranteeing states rights will, if challenged, when making it known
that we as individuals of the several states will not be treated as chattel of the U.S.
Structure of the Birth Certificate
4
government. If the federal government believes they own us, and as such have the right to
demand national I.D. cards, and health I.D. cards, which will in truth tag us as we tag our
animals, then let them bring forth the documents to prove their authority to legislate for
it. If our GOD given unalienable rights to life, liberty and freedom, which were the
foundation upon which this nation was created do not exist and liberty and freedom is
only an illusion under which the American people suffer, then let the governments of this
nation come forward and tell the people. But...if we are indeed free, then we should not
have to plead or beg before our elected public servants to be treated as such. If, in truth
we are not free, then perhaps it's time to let the final chapter of the Great American
Revolution be written.
NOTICE: Information served herein is for educational
purposes only, no liability assumed for use. The
information you obtain in this presentation is not, nor is it
intended to be, legal advice. Author does not consent to
unlawful action. Author advocates and encourages one
and all to adhere to, support and defend all law which is
particularly applicable. If anything in this presentation is
found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to
correct it in timely fashion upon notification.
VOID where prohibited by law.
Structure of the Birth Certificate
5