Pjibwe History http://www.mpm.edu/wirp/icw-151.html

Ojibwe History

http://www.mpm.edu/wirp/icw-151.html

Navigate this page...

Contact with Europeans      Distrust of the United States      Land Cessions and Resevations      St. Croix and Mole Lake      Treaty Rights Reclaimed      Related Topics and Resources

	The Ojibwe are an Algonkian-speaking tribe and constitute the largest Indian group north of Mexico. The Ojibwe stretch from present-day Ontario in eastern Canada all the way into Montana. Oral traditions of the Ojibwe, Ottawa, and Potawatomi assert that at one time all three tribes were one people who lived at the Straits of Mackinac. From there, they split off into three different groups. Linguistic, archeological, and historical evidence suggests that the three tribes do indeed descend from a common ethnic origin. The three languages are almost identical. The Ojibwe call themselves "Anishinaabeg," which means the "True People" or the "Original People." Other Indians and Europeans called them "Ojibwe" or "Chippewa," which meant "puckered up," probably because the Ojibwe traditionally wore moccasins with a puckered seam across the top. The Ojibwe are believed to have made contact with Europeans in 1615 when the French explorer Samuel de Champlain arrived at Lake Huron, where some Ojibwe lived. In 1622, one of Champlain's men, Etienne Brule, explored Lake Superior and made contact with Ojibwe groups farther to the west. Many Ojibwe lived near the rapids of the St. Mary's River, and the French began to refer to the Ojibwe there as "Saulteaux," derived from the French word sault, or rapids. In 1641, French Jesuits first visited the area of Sault Ste. Marie (as they called the rapids of the St. Mary's River), and by 1667 had established a Christian mission there. Like other Indian groups, the Ojibwe were forced westward beginning in the 1640s when the League of the Iroquois began to attack other tribes in the Great Lakes region to monopolize the fur trade. The Ojibwe did not suffer as much as other tribes, however, and by the 1690s they had won some impressive victories against the Iroquois. Because of this the League of the Iroquois sued for peace with the French and their Indian allies in 1701. Contact with Europeans Like other Indian tribes, the Ojibwe allied themselves to the French militarily and economically. They traded with the French who entered the Great Lakes in the 1660s, and their desire to obtain European trade goods drove the Ojibwe to expand westward into Lake Superior to find richer fur-bearing lands. Soon, they came into contact with the Eastern, or Santee Dakota (commonly known as the Sioux). During the 1730s, the Ojibwe and Dakota began to fight over the region around the western point of Lake Superior and the headwaters of the Mississippi River in Minnesota and this war lasted until the 1850's. The Ojibwe were generally successful, and they managed to push the Dakota farther west into Minnesota and North and South Dakota. The main Ojibwe settlement in Wisconsin at this time was on Madeline Island in Chequamegon Bay, Lake Superior. In 1745, the Ojibwe of Lake Superior began to move inland into Wisconsin, with their first permanent village at Lac Courte Oreilles at the headwaters of the Chippewa River. Later, the Ojibwe expanded into other parts of northern Wisconsin, particularly Lac du Flambeau. The name of this village in French means "Lake of the Flames" because the Ojibwe speared fish at night using torches attached to the end of their birchbark canoes. The Ojibwe sided with the French during the wars that France and Britain fought between 1689 and 1763. The Ojibwe were particularly active during the final conflict, the French and Indian War or Seven Years' War from 1754 to 1763. When France lost Canada and the Midwest to the British between 1761 and 1763, the Ojibwe did not trust their new colonial overlords. Unlike the French, the British treated the Indians with contempt and disdain, causing an Ottawa chief at Detroit named Pontiac to lead a pan-Indian rebellion against the British in 1763. The Ojibwe at the Straits of Mackinac participated along with some Sauk by massacring the entire British army garrison there. However, the Ojibwe of northern Wisconsin and the southern shore of Lake Superior did not join the uprising; Jean Baptiste Cadotte--a trader of French-Canadian and Ojibwe descent--urged them not to fight the British. Their participation would probably not have done much good anyway, since the British suppressed the revolt by 1765. Afterward, the British took a more conciliatory approach to the Indians and established better relations with the tribes. Like most Midwestern Indian groups, the Ojibwe became staunch allies of the British afterward. top Distrust of the United States The fur trade prospered in the Lake Superior region during Britain's tenure of control. The United States gained all lands south of the Great Lakes after the American Revolution ended in 1783 with the Treaty of Paris. However, British fur trading companies in Canada, particularly the mighty North West Company, continued to operated trading posts in the Ojibwe lands of northern Wisconsin and Minnesota until 1815. The United States became concerned with the growing British influence in the region. An 1805-1806 expedition led by American army officer Lieutenant Zebulon M. Pike attempted to undermine British influence and end the Ojibwe-Dakota wars, but it had little effect. British and French-Canadian traders continued to operate in the Lake Superior country, and the Ojibwe-Dakota war continued. Like other Indians in the Midwest, the Ojibwe sided with the British because they believed that the United States would take their lands. Many Ojibwe became adherents of Tecumseh and the Shawnee Prophet (or Tenskwatawa), Shawnee brothers in Ohio who preached a doctrine of resisting American expansion. Tecumseh and the Shawnee Prophet formed a pan-Indian confederacy that fought alongside the British during the War of 1812. Many Ojibwe from the region around Detroit fought against the U.S., but Ojibwe bands in northern Wisconsin generally stayed out of the fighting despite being pro-British. After the war ended in 1814, the Ojibwe of northern Wisconsin continued to distrust the Americans and often traded with British traders across the border in Canada. They also continued to harbor a hatred for the Dakota, and the war between the two tribes intensified in the early 1800s. The United States tried twice to make peace treaties between the Ojibwe and Dakota. The first was at Prairie du Chien in 1825, and a second treaty was held at Fond du Lac, Minnesota in 1826. Neither resulted in a lasting peace. Once the lands that separated the Ojibwe and the Dakota were purchased and settled by the Americans, warfare between the two tribes ceased. top Land Cessions and Reservations The federal government made two major land cession treaties with the Wisconsin Ojibwe. The first was in 1837, when the Ojibwe sold most of their land in north-central Wisconsin and eastern Minnesota. The next was finalized in 1842 and the Ojibwe ceded their remaining lands in Wisconsin and Michigan's upper peninsula. Soon, American lumberjacks fell upon the rich pine stands, and miners began to exploit the copper mines along the southern shore of Lake Superior. The United States hoped to remove the Ojibwe from northern Wisconsin in the 1840s, but the Indians did not want to leave their homes. Many Ojibwe chiefs went to Washington in 1849 and begged President Zachary Taylor to allow them to stay. They asserted they had signed the 1842 treaty thinking they could stay on their ceded lands. Taylor refused to listen to them. After Millard Fillmore became president on Taylor's death in 1850, another Ojibwe delegation visited Washington in 1852. Fillmore was more amenable to the Ojibwe chiefs, and he agreed to hold another treaty with them in 1854. By this treaty, the Ojibwe ceded the last of their land in Minnesota to the United States, and in return received reservations of land. The 1854 treaty created four of the modern-day Ojibwe reservations in Wisconsin: Bad River, Red Cliff, Lac du Flambeau, and Lac Courte Oreilles. top St. Croix and Mole Lake Once the reservations were created, the Ojibwe were unable to sustain themselves by hunting and gathering and many Ojibwe men worked as lumberjacks for White-owned companies. While lumbering brought some economic benefits to the Wisconsin Ojibwe, it also bought continued land loss. Congress passed the Dawes Act in 1887, designed to help Indians live more like Whites by dividing up reservation lands so they could all own individual farms. The land in northern Wisconsin was not good for farming, and many Ojibwe sold their land to lumber companies to supplement their wages. On some reservations, over 90% of the land passed into White hands. Things began to improve for the Wisconsin Ojibwe in the twentieth century. Under the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Ojibwe communities along the St. Croix River in northwestern Wisconsin and those at Mole Lake in northeastern Wisconsin--which had not received reservations in the 1854 treaty--received reservation lands. The St. Croix Ojibwe received 1750 acres in 1938, and the Mole Lake band received 1680 acres in 1937. top Treaty Rights Reclaimed The Wisconsin Ojibwes' greatest victory in reclaiming their treaty-reserved rights came in 1983. When the Ojibwe signed the 1837 and 1842 treaties, they reserved the right to hunt and fish on the lands they had ceded to the United States. For many years, the state of Wiscosnin convicted Ojibwes who fished and hunted off their reservations without licenses. In January 1983, the federal district court in Chicago affirmed that the two treaties guaranteed Wisconsin Ojibwes' right to hunt and fish on the land they ceded to the United States. Despite their victory, things did not go smoothly when the Ojibwe tried to assert their rights. Ojibwe fishermen were harassed at boat landings throughout northern Wisconsin and often had to withstand racial slurs and physical assaults by non-Indians. The state of Wisconsin attempted unsuccessfully to fight the federal court's decision. It even offered the Wisconsin Ojibwe millions of dollars if they would relinquish their treaty rights, but they refused to enter into any such agreement. During the 1990s, violence at boat landings has died down somewhat. The Wisconsin Ojibwe have helped ease tensions by stocking walleye in the lakes where they spearfish. Indeed, the Ojibwe put more fish into the lakes than they take out, and the number of fish they spear is very small compared to the number non-Indian sport fishermen take out every year. top
Related Topics and Resources Relations between Indians and Whites Ojibwe Treaty Rights Ojibwe Culture

Worcester v. Georgia

31 US 515, 8 L. Ed. 483, 18 S. Ct. 620 - Supreme Court, 1832 - Google Scholar
... and annexed to, a writ of error issued in regular form, the citation being signed by one ... then treated
the injurious calumny of cherishing designs unfriendly to the political and civil rights of the ... We
may ask, further: did the Cherokees come to the seat of the American government to ...
Cited by 6448 - How cited - Related articles - All 4 versions

LAC COURTE OREILLES BAND, ETC. v. Voigt

700 F. 2d 341 - Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, 1983 - Google Scholar
... to be permitted to remain on their lands for "one hundred years to come." The Chief ...
Treaty-recognized rights of use, or usufructuary rights, do not necessarily require that the tribe
have ... The same treaty reserved to the Indians the "`right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed ...
Cited by 317 - How cited - Related articles

Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians

526 US 172, 119 S. Ct. 1187, 143 L. Ed. 2d 270 - Supreme Court, 1999 - Google Scholar
... Besadny v. Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, 464 US 805 (1983)
(Brennan, Marshall ... a right to make, ante, at 193-194), he terminated the Indians' right to come
onto the ... Indeed, the Indians then had no legal rights at all with respect to the ceded lands ...
Cited by 582 - How cited - Related articles - All 4 versions

Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. State of Minn.

124 F. 3d 904 - Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, 1997 - Google Scholar
... of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Voigt, 700 F.2d 341 (7th Cir.1983) (LCO), where it ... We come
to the same conclusion when we examine the swamp land cause of action. ... The original petition
before the ICC stated that usufructuary rights were "a material consideration" for ...
Cited by 120 - How cited - Related articles

Lac Courte Oreilles Chippewa Ind. v. State of Wis.

653 F. Supp. 1420 - Dist. Court, WD Wisconsin, 1987 - Google Scholar
... aspen, prickly gooseberry, wild black currant, wild red currant, smooth gooseberry, Ojibwe potato,
hop ... were engaged in the fur trade long before non-Indians came to Wisconsin to ... in fact-finding
as to the Chippewa's understanding of whether their treaty-reserved rights could be ...
Cited by 84 - How cited - Related articles

Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota

861 F. Supp. 784 - Dist. Court, Minnesota, 1994 - Google Scholar
... 785 786 787 788 James M. Genia, Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, Onamia, MN, Marc D. Slonim,
John B. Arum, Ziontz ... a telegraphic dispatch came to hand viz ... and farmers under earlier treaties
in the new treaty, but he did not instruct Gilbert to cancel any reserved usufructuary rights. ...
Cited by 43 - How cited - Related articles

To Feel the Summer in the Spring: The Treaty Fishing Rights of the Wisconsin Chippewa

CF Wilkinson - Wis. L. Rev., 1991 - HeinOnline
... 1980); T. RoUFS, THE ANISHINABE OF THE MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA TRIBE (1975); C. VECSEY,
TRADITIONAL OJIBWA RELIGION AND ITS HISTORICAL CHANGES (1983); T. VENNUM, WILD
RICE AND THE OJIBWAY PEOPLE (1988 ... 1991:375 Treaty Fishing Rights ...
Cited by 62 - Related articles - Library Search - All 3 versions

Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. State of Minn.

952 F. Supp. 1362 - Dist. Court, Minnesota, 1997 - Google Scholar
... 1363 1364 James M. Genia, Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, Onamia, MN, Marc D. Slonim and John
1365 B ... A: This come back to our catchability model that — and refers to walleye. ... Allocation has
arisen in the Washington fishing rights cases in modern times in light of the scarcity of ...
Cited by 33 - How cited - Related articles

Twelve Super-State Regional-Jurisdictions of the U.S.A;

From "Black's Law Dictionary", the following Definitions are Cited
for Assisting our new Fellow Supporters
in comprehendoing the "Basis in Law" for our activities here-in:

     Constitution: The organic and fundamental law of a nation or state, which may be written or un-written, establishing the character and conception of it’s government, laying the basic principles to which its internal life is to be conformed, organizing the government, and regulating, distributing, and limiting the functions of the different departments, and prescribing the extent and manner of the exercise of sovereign powers.
A charter of government deriving its whole authority from the governed.
      The written instrument agreed upon by the people of the Union or of a particular state, as the absolute rule of action and decision for all departments and officers of the government in respect to points covered by it, which must control until it shall be changed by the authority which established it, and in opposition to which any act or ordinance of any such department or officer is null and void. ...
In a more general sense, any fundamental or important law or edict; as the Novel Constitutions of Justinian; the Constitutions of Clarendon.

     Constitutional Law:   (1) That branch of the public law of a nation or state which treats of the organization, powers and frame of government, the distribution of political and governmental authorities and functions, the fundamental principles which are to regulate the relations of government and citizen, and which prescribes generally the plan and method according to which the public affairs of the nation or state are to be administered.
     (2) That department of the science of law which treats of constitutions, their establishment, construction, and interpretation, and of the validity of legal enactments as tested by the criterion of conformity to the fundamental law.
     (3) A constitutional law is one which is consonant to, and agrees with, the constitution; one which is not in violation of any provision of he constitution of the particular state.
     Constitutional Questions:  Those legal issues which require an interpretation of the Constitution; for their resolution as distinguished from those of a statutory nature.
     De facto:  In fact, in deed, actually. This phrase is used to characterize an officer, a government, a past action, or a state of affairs which must be accepted for all practical purposes, but is illegal or illegitimate.
Thus an office, position or status existing under a claim or color of right such as a de facto corporation.
In this sense, it is the contrary of de jure, which means rightful, legitimate, just or constitutional.   Thusan officer, king, or government de facto is one who is in actual possession of the office or supreme power, but by usurpation, or without lawful title; while an officer, king, or government de jure is one who has just claim and rightful title to the office or power; but has never had plenary possession of it, or is not in actual possession.
     De facto government:  One that maintains itself by a display of force against the will of the rightful legal government and is successful, at least temporarily, in overturning the institutions of the rightful legal government by setting up its own in lieu thereof.
     De facto judge:  A judge who functions under color of authority but whose authority is defective in some procedural form.
     De facto officer: One who, while in actual possession of an office, is not holding such in a manner prescribed by law.
     De jure:  Description of a condition in which there has been total compliance with all requirement s of law.
Of right; legitimate; lawful; by right and just title. In this sense, it is the contrary of de facto.
It may also be contrasted with de grata, in which case it means “as a matter of right”, as de grata means by grace or favor. Again, it may be contrasted with de equitate; here meaning “by law”, as the latter means “by equity”.
     Unconstitutional.  That which is contrary to the constitution. ...
This word is used in two different senses. One, which may be called the English sense, is that the legislation conflicts with some recognized general principle. This is no more than to say that it is unwise, or is based upon a wrong or unsound principle, or conflicts with a general ly accepted policy.
The other, which may be called the American sense, is that th legislation conflicts with some provision of our written Constitution, which is beyond the power of the Legislature to change.
     Organic Law: The fundamental law, or constitution, of a state or nation, written or unwritten. That law or system of laws or principles which defines and establishes the organization of its government.
     Organic Act: ... A statute by which a municipal corporation is organized and created is its “organic act” and the limit of its power, so that all acts beyond the scope of the powers there granted are void.
     Organize: To establish or furnish with organs; to systemize; to put into working order; to arrange in order for normal exercise of its appropriate functions.
     Fundamental Law: The law which determines the constitution of government in a nation or state, and prescribes the manner of its exercise. The organic law of a nation or state; its constitution.
     Fundamental Right: Those which have their origin in the express terms of the Constitution or which are ecessarily to be implied from those terms..

"Black's Law Dictionary", Fifth Edition, 1979, West Publishing Company, St. Paul Minnesota.The http://constitutionalgov.us/BLD.htm

Twelve Super-State Regional-Jurisdictions of the U.S.A;

a detailed explanation there-of.

The Main Goal of this Organization is to Organize our American Community of Patriots into a Sustainable & Self-Sufficient Organic Body-Politic; and which is Capable of Successfully Defending Our Constituent American People against a Hostile and Criminally-Syndicated Parasite-Class, which has Infiltrated & gained Possession of Many of the Highest Offices in our American Government, all largely through their Immense Wealth, and Advanced Propaganda and Military Capabilities. Many in our Community of Concerned American Patriots seems now to have finally come to the enlightened realization that, in order to Successfully Defend Our-Selves against these Enemies, that We Must Develop an Organization with Sufficient Dedication and Corporate or Military Style “Discipline” so that we may Effectively Battle against that Hostile and Criminally-Syndicated Parasite Class. And please be clear, that for the largest part, and especially for the present, this “Battle” is “Non-Physical”, and is focusing mostly in the Political, Legal, Religious, and Communications/Media Realms.

But even in these “Non-Physical” Realms, the Enemy which we confront is Operating with “Military Efficiency”; and there is simply “No Way” that our Innocent American People will be able to Successfully Defend Ourselves, Unless the most Dedicated and Courageous among us Solemnly-Affirm, upon our Honor, that We Will Work With Each Other in a Similarly Militarily-Efficient and Reasonable Manner.

The reasoning behind our particular organizing strategy set forth here-in, is explained more fully else-where; but briefly it is based on a profound respect for the Model of Governmental Organizing which was used by ancient Israel, with its Regional Sub-Divisions of its “Twelve Tribes”. The traditionally-recognized spiritual and metaphysical implications of the Number “Twelve” have also played a large role in our choices in this effort. Careful contemplation of these factors, and of the few other available Models for solving the larger USA organic-government organizing- problem, reveals that it is simply More Natural, More Organic, and More Responsive to the Needs of our American Body-Politic, to follow this “Israelite based Model”, or “Common-Law Model”.

Here-under; each regional jurisdiction can not be sub-divided into any more than Twelve Divisions, because that will cause too many variables for any elected leader there-in to effectively supervise, and consensus-building there-under will become very elusive, and chaos and the negative-definition of “Anarchy” will quickly become a serious danger. It is much more efficient to build-into the organizing model additional lower-levels of Hierarchy, with “Consensus” Required from Each of the even Smaller Communities of each of those lower-levels also, all as seems to be at least implied (if not directly commanded) in Numbers 1: 16, 7: 84, Exodus 18: 13 - 26, Deuteronomy 12 - 17, Mark 6: 39 - 40, and Luke 9: 14 - 15 .

As it is written about briefly here-in, this organic body-politic governing model and its working procedures may all be too difficult for many people to comprehend. However; there are other more comprehensive documents available; and once this historically-based organic body-politic organizing system all begins to visibly function, then that difficulty of comprehension of how it is actually suppose to work should quickly evaporate. Much like an airplane, either it will fly, or it will not; and the results will be clearly obvious to everyone.

More specifically here-under; those organizing this effort have come to the fairly solid belief that the above mentioned concerns are best addressed by Organizing the Dedicated Patriots in our Organic American Body-Politic in the following manner:

First, our American National Nation/State is to be Divided into Twelve comparatively easily-governable and Localized “Super-State” Jurisdictional Communities, aka: National “Circuit Courts-of-Law”; each of which should contain a Population-Count which is a close approximation of an Equal 1/12 Sub-Division of our Total American National Population, which was estimated by the US Census Bureau in the year 2000 to be “281,421,906". Calculations based on these proportionally-balanced ideals results in Each of the Twelve Super-State Jurisdictions being targeted to contain approximately 24,949,873.75 American People. The geographical-boundaries of a system based on these calculations produces the Twelve Super-State Jurisdictions which are presented on the Map on this domain's main web-page. As is obvious form this map, and from the data listed below, the population counts actually arrived at for each Super-State Region have Varied significantly from this ideal population-count; but our desire to respect the present geographical boundaries of each of the States, requires that, at least for the time-being, we organize in this manner.

Major Modifications can be made to each of these regional jurisdictions by the American Patriot Members in good-standing who reside in each of these regional jurisdictions. They can change the name of their jurisdiction, and they can change their “Pro-Tem Presiding Leader”, and they can do all of this as often as they deem necessary. This is “Responsible Self-Governing”, and it is a largely lost-art, which is desperately needed to be restored if we are going to save our America People from the tyranny and despotism presently facing us.

All "Population Counts" have been taken from the "Year 2000 Census Bureau Statistics" web-page, which may be reviewed for accuracy here : http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/ .

All honorable Americans are invited to join with us.

Each of these Twelve Super-State Regions is presently named and numbered as follows:
Super-State 1: New England Region: Total Population: 14,269,989.States: Maine, 1,321,574; Vermont, 623,908; New Hampshire: 1,314,895; Massachusetts, 6,437,193; Rhode Island, 1,076,610; Connecticut, 3,504,809.ProTem Presiding Leader: David Kenefick, Massachusetts, dp.kenefick_at_verizon.net .

Super-State 2: New York Region: Total Population: 19,306,183.ProTem Presiding Leader: William Cerf; Brooklyn, N.Y., william.cerf_at_gmail.com .
Super-State 3: Jersey/Pennsylvania Region. Total Population: 28,215,914. States: Pennsylvania: 12,440,621; New Jersey 8,724,560; Delaware 853,476; Maryland: 5,615,727; WDC: 581,530. ProTem Presiding Leader: Aaron Bolinger; Pennsylvania, aaron_at_nvcca.net
Super-State 4: Virginia/Carolina Region. Total Population: 22,639,108.States: Virginia: 7,642,884; West-Virginia: 1,818,470; North-Carolina: 8,856,505; South-Carolina: 4,321,249.ProTem Presiding Leader: None-Presently; Contact Aaron Bolinger from the Jersey/Penn Region; & join the Monday-Evening RtR Leadership Conference.

Super-State 5: Great-Lakes Region; Total Population: 27,332,070. States: Ohio: 11,478,006; Michigan: 10,095,643; Indiana: 6,313,520.
ProTem Presiding Leader: David Schied; Michigan, desschied-at-yahoo.com.
Super-State 6: Florida/Georgia Region: Total Population: 27,453,830.States: Florida: 18,089,889; Georgia: 9,363,941.ProTem Presiding Leader: Gabrielle, Florida
Super State 7: Mississippi Region: Total Population: 30,695,800.States: Louisiana, 4,287,768; Arkansas, 2,810,872; Mississippi, 2,910,540; Alabama: 4,599,030; Tennessee: 6,038,803; Kentucky: 4,206,074, Missouri: 5,842,713.ProTem Presiding Leader: None-Presently; Join the Monday Evening RTR Leaders Conferences.

Super-State 8: North-Central Region: Total Population: 26,537,662.States: Illinois: 12,831,970; Wisconsin: 5,556,506; Iowa: 2,982,085; Minnesota: 5,167,101.ProTem Presiding Leader: Gary Franchi or Fred Smart, both in the Chicago Area.

Super-State 9: Texas Region: Total Population: 23,507,783.ProTem Presiding Leader: None-Presently; Join the Monday Evening RTR Leaders Conferences.

Super-State 10: South-West Region:
Total Population: 23,535,975.States: Nebraska, 1,768,331; Kansas, 2,764,075; Oklahoma: 3,579,212; Utah, 2,550,063; Colorado: 4,753,377; Arizona, 6,166,318; New Mexico, 1,954,599. ProTem Presiding Leader: None-Presently; Join the Monday Evening RTR Leaders Conferences.

Super State 11: California Region:Total Population: 36,457,549ProTem Presiding Leader: James Fowler, San Diego, jjsandiego_at_gmail.com?
Super State 12: Pacific-NW Region; Total Population: 18,879,152. States: Hawaii, 1,285,498; Alaska: 670,053; Washington: 5,395,798; Oregon: 3,700,758; Idaho, 1,466,465; Nevada: 2,495,529; Montana, 944,632; Wyoming, 515,004; North Dakota, 635,867; South Dakota, 769,548. ProTem Presiding Leader: Charles Stewart, Sandy Oregon, charles_at_constitutionalgov.us .

As indicated in the list above, a number of these regions do not yet have "Pro-Tem Presiding-Leaders". If anyone wishes to volunteer for these positions, please ask them to contact myself, and to attend our RtR Leadership Conference-Calls on Talkshoe.com, every Monday evening.

Smaller Mini-State jurisdictions are also being organized, under each of these Twelve Super-State Jurisdictions; and examples are shown on some partially-completed web-pages, here: http://newyork.superstate.us
http://california.superstate.us/

Spaces are available for other similar super-state regions here:http://superstate.us/

http://constitutionalgov.us/12regionsdetails.html

Citations Showing that "We the People" have the Right & Duty
to Resist Tyrants who Masquerade as
Our Constitutionally-Lawful Governmental Officers:

Sixteenth American Jurisprudence 2d; SS: 256 & 257; (Pages: 547 & 177?)
         "The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law,
is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose;
since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment,  and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.
An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed.
Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
“Such an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority to anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts preformed under it . . .
“A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.
“No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." . . .
“The fact that one acts in reliance on a statute which has theretofore been adjudged unconstitutionaldoes not protect him from civil or criminal responsibility ...

***************************************
Carpenter v. Carter, 298 US 296, 193
       And the Constitution itself is in every real sense a law - the “Lawmakers being the People themselves”, in whom under Our System All Political Power & Sovereignty primarily Resides, & through whom such Power & Sovereignty primarily Speaks.
        It is by that law, and not otherwise, that the legislative, executive, and judicial agencies which it created exercise such political authority as they have been permitted to possess.  The Constitution speaks for itself in terms so plain that to misunderstand their import is not rationally possible.
         “We the people of the United States,” it says, “do ordain and establish this Constitution ...”
         Ordain and Establish !   These are definite words of enactment, and without more would stamp what follows with dignity and character of law.  The framers of the Constitution, however, were not content to let the matter rest here, but provided explicitly -  “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ...”
        The supremacy of the Constitution as law is thus declared without qualification.  That supremacy is absolute; the supremacy of a statute enacted by Congress is not absolute but conditioned upon its being made in pursuance to the Constitution. And a judicial tribunal, clothed by that instrument with complete judicial power, and, therefore, by the very nature of the power, required to ascertain and apply the law to the facts in every case or proceeding properly brought for adjudication, must apply the supreme law and reject the inferior statute whenever the two conflict.

******************************************************
"Declaration of Independence" (Quote)
Oregon's Constitution, Article 1 Section 1. (Quote)


http://constitutionalgov.us/DissentCitations.htm

Index of /cbsinfo

• Parent Directory
• CBS-Bio3.html
• CBS-Bio3.odt
• CBS-Bio3.pdf
• CBS-Bio3.rtf
• CBS-IDCard.doc
• CBS-IDCard.htm
• CBS-IDCard.pdf
• CBS-IDCard.wpd
• CBSPortriat.jpg
• JeffCharles&Jim1.jpg
• JeffCharles&Jim2.jpg