Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
How Long Can A Corporation Live?

How Long Can A Corporation Live?

Ratings: (0)|Views: 588|Likes:
Published by famousafguy

More info:

Categories:Types, School Work
Published by: famousafguy on Jun 20, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





How Long Can A Corporation Live?In order to keep this short, I'll get right to the point. I have been saying forover two years that Americans are still subject to the king/queen (crown) ofEngland. Why? You are subject to whom you pay a tribute/tax. I have shown how thecrown is still receiving a tax to compensate the king for his corporate venture inAmerica. I have shown many documents where the king by Charter created severalcorporations in America. These corporations were consolidated into America Inc.,in 1783. I have said and shown in these documents, that not only did the kingintend for his corporations to last forever, but also his tax to benefit his heirsand successors, forever.I am going to show you by a recently obtained newspaper article, provided by theInformer that brings the historical facts I have presented crashing into thepresent, in a very sobering way.A couple of weeks ago I put out via email historical documents concerning thecreation of New Jersey. I am not going to again attach them to this email, becauseit would make it unnecessarily long, which may cause some people to skim theinformation rather than read it. Anyone that would like these documents concerningthe creation of New Jersey, can send me an email to that effect, and I willpromptly send it to you.I include in total at the end of this research paper the news article I will nowquote from."....They were 12 men, most of them from London. Most would never set foot in theNew World. But they owned half of what would become New Jersey, 1.1 million acresof verdant field and forest and pristine; shoreline.All but a smattering of those lands, were: sold off long ago, but theircorporation survived, its shares handed down from generation to generation.It is now 314 years old, the oldest continuously operated corporation in theUnited States. But not for long. A court will soon dissolve the East Jersey Boardof Proprietors, and a vestige of Colonial America will be gone..... Still, theproprietors met every year, on the third Tuesday of May, to sort through theyear's business. Shares were bought and sold, though the proprietors arecircumspect when asked about the price (I could never get a straight answer," saidLurie).Among the shareholders are prominent families like that of former Gov. ThomasKean. Fewer than half live in New Jersey, and some live in Europe....... But if heshould regret the loss, he could by a share in the board's successor as thenation's oldest corporation: the West Jersey Board of Proprietors, is still goingstrong with 3,200 shareholders." (Liquidation of the East Jersey Board ofProprietors, Philadelphia Inquirer August 10, 1998)That's right America, the very East New Jersey Charter/grant to the king'sproprietors, is still alive and kicking. Also, the West New Jersey corporationwhich boasts 3,200 proprietors, sounds like the king's subjects are stillprospering from his original grant. The only reason the East New JerseyCorporation is being dissolved is, because the young heirs have lost interest inthe Corporation.What does this mean, to dissolve the East New Jersey Corporation? This is just onequestion I want to address. I question that a civil District court can dissolve acorporation, it had nothing to do with, in its creation. How can a de facto court,dissolve a corporation created under the common law? If the corporation is
dissolved, what does this mean?The king of England was grantor of the corporation in America, this cannot bedisputed. He is the Corporation Sole, the grantor of the early Charters. Apart ofhis corporate Charters were the creation of civil corporations, the governments,from the biggest to the smallest. The king also saw fit to reward those close tohim with grants of land, either sole proprietors or as a group of proprietors,known as an aggregate corporation. The corporation formed by the king formed atree with him as the base, the main corporation. His Charters are subcorporations; his sole or aggregate proprietors are sub sub corporations, furtherup the tree. These corporations are just as the corporations of today, in the waythey are set up and managed. The United States was and is a consolidation andrestructuring of the sub corporations, the colonies, North Carolina, Virginia,etc, extending to all states in Union; upon their admission they also arerecreated District States, by the March 4, 1791 Act by Washington."Corporation Sole: A corporation consisting of one person only and his successors.An older concept of the status of a king or a bishop as incorporated in order togive to them and their successors legal capacities and advantages, particularlythat of perpetuity, which they could not have in their natural capacities."Ballentine's Law Dictionary, Third Ed., 1969Also, see the following court cases:ASHEVILLE DIVISION NO. 15 v. ASTON, 92 N.C. 2 S.E. 70DOUGHERTY v. SPRINKLE, 88 N.C. 300 (1883) 2 S.E. 70CARSON v. COMMISSIONERS, 64 N.C. 566 (1870) 2 S.E. 70McDOWELL v. HEMPHILL, 60 N.C. 95 (1863) 2 S.E. 70FEREBEE v. SANDERS, 25 N.C. 360 (1843) 2 S.E. 70Now, what would be the effect of the East New Jersey proprietors corporation beingdissolved? The holdings revert back up the line in the corporate tree, towards theking. If the U.S. did not exist as the corporation next in line, it would go backto the king's heirs and successors. This is called reversion."Reversion. The residue of an estate and left in the grantor, to commence inpossession after the determination of some particular estate granted out by him.The return of land to the grantor and his heirs after the grant is over."Bouvier's Law Dictionary, vol. 3, 1914"....But this State had no title to the territory prior to the title of the Kingof Great Britain and his subjects, nor did it ever claim as lord paramount tothem. This State was not the original grantor to them, nor did they ever hold byany kind of tenure under the State, or owe it any allegiance or other duties towhich an escheat is annexed. How then can it be said that the lands in this casenaturally result back by a kind of reversion to this State, to a source fromwhence it never issued, and from tenants who never held under it....?MARSHALL v. LOVELESS, 1 N.C. 412 (1801), 2 S.A. 70As the original grantor and corporation (the king) exist, the corporation isforever as written. As I have said before, the Charters of the king were alsowritten to be trusts. To further understand this read the following quotes fromBlackstone's Commentaries."637. d. Lay corporations. (1) Civil corporations; (2) Eleemosynary corporations.Lay corporations are of two sorts, civil and eleemosynary. The civil are such asare erected for a variety of temporal purposes. The king, for instance, is made acorporation to prevent in general the possibility of an interregnum or vacancy ofthe throne, and to preserve the possessions of the crown entire; for, immediately
upon the demise of one king, his successor and dignity. Other lay corporations areerected for the good government of a town or particular district, as a mayor andcommonalty, bailiff and burgesses, or the like: some for the advancement andregulation of manufactures and commerce; as the trading companies of London, andother towns:...."Blackstone's Commentaries, vol. 1 pg. 677"639. b. English law. (1) Corporations by common law; (2) Corporations byprescription. But, with us in England, the king's consent is absolutely necessaryto the erection of any corporation, either impliedly or expressly given....Anothermethod of implication, whereby the king's consent is presumed, is as to allcorporations by prescription, such as the city of London, and many others, whichhave existed as corporations, time whereof the memory of man runneth not to thecontrary; and therefore are looked upon in law to be well created. For though themember thereof can show no legal Charter of incorporation, yet in cases of suchhigh antiquity the law presumes there once was one; and that by the variety ofaccidents, which a length of time may produce, the Charter is lost or destroyed."Blackstone's Commentaries, vol. 1 pg. 680"640. (3) Consent of king, how given. (a) By parliament. The methods, by which theking's consent is expressly given, are either by act of parliament or Charter."Blackstone's Commentaries, vol. 1 pg. 681"641. (b) By Charter. All the other methods, therefore whereby corporations exist,by common law, by prescription, and by act of parliament, are for the most partreducible to this of the king's letters patent, or Charter of incorporation. Theking's creation may be performed by the words "creamus, erigimus, fundamus,incorporamus (we create, we erect, we found, we incorporate)," or the like. Nay,it is held, that if the king grants to a set of men to have gildam mercatoriam, amercantile meeting or assembly, this is alone sufficient to incorporate andestablish them forever."Blackstone's Commentaries, vol. 1 pg. 682643. (5) Creation of corporations by patent. The king (it is said) may grant to asubject the power of erecting corporations, through the contrary was formerlyheld: that, is may permit the subject to name the persons and powers of thecorporation at his pleasure; but it is really the king that erects, and thesubject is but the instrument: for though none but the king can make acorporation, ye qui facit per alium, facit per se (he who does a thing by theagency of another, does it himself)."Blackstone's Commentaries, vol. 1 pg. 682"651. b. Civil corporations (1) Lay corporations. ....But first, as I have laid itdown as a rule that the founder, his heirs, or assigns, are the visitors of alllay corporations, let us inquire what is meant by the founder. The confounder ofall corporations in the strictest and original sense is the king alone, for heonly can incorporate a society; and in civil incorporations, such as mayor andcommonalty, etc., where there are no possessions or endowments given to the body,there is no other founder but the king:"....Blackstone's Commentaries, vol. 1 pg. 685654. 10. Dissolution of corporations. ....But the body politic may also itself bedissolved in several ways; which dissolution is the civil death of thecorporation: and in this case their lands and tenements shall revert to theperson, or his heirs, who granted them to the corporation: for the law doth annexa condition to every such grant, that if the corporation be dissolved, the grantorshall have the lands again, only during the life of the corporation; which mayendure forever: but, when that life is determined by the dissolution of the body

Activity (6)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
jacklamp liked this
jacklamp liked this
killmicrosoft liked this
TruthPress liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->