From: John (Jack) R. Venrick [jacksranch@skynetbb.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:19 PM
To: AJack R. Venrick
Subject: Additional Research on The History of Dick Act of 1902
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Venrick
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 11:58 PM
Subject: Additional Research on The History of Dick Act of 1902
To: Property Rights Groups and
Freedom Foundations
Attention Dale Pond & Roni
This just came in from Paul H., one
of our more enlighten and embattled rural property owner's. He is giving
permission to distribute this research with the condition credit
be given to "a legal researcher I know" and NOT "Paul
Hiatt".
I have not spent much time on this subject
however it is another intriguing piece of the puzzle how our national,
state and individual sovereignty are connected. When the militia dies,
our sovereignty soon falls and the shadow government grows stronger.
Jack Venrick
Enumclaw,
Washington
This
is a PS that came in following email below.
Jack,
you'll note I mentioned the Warner Act of 2006-2007
where they dicked with Posse Comitatus some more to give
the feds (president control of ALL state's NG and militia
forces in a declared "national state of emergency". There
really isn't much left of the original intent today, but I
do have a good article from Washington Law Review on the
subject on disk if you're interested after reading this.
----- Original Message -----
From:Paul
H.
To: Jack Venrick
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: The Dick Act of 1902
I
trust you will find this fairly recent research of mine
on the subject instructive, Jack. This was something I
posted to a discussion forum last year in response to a
piece by Edwin Vierra on the subject of the state's
militias, but I think it's most of what you want to know.
_________
This quote from a brief recently filed in a class action
in US District Court:
"The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of
Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all
so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia
into three distinct and separate entities. The three
classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia,
henceforth known as the National Guard of the States,
Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized
militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses
every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All
members of the unorganized militia have the absolute
personal right and 2d Amendment right to keep and bear
arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.
The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would
violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which
would be yet another gross violation of the U.S.
Constitution arid the Bill of Rights."
Yes, one of the three classes of the U.S. Constitutional
Militia is the "Army".
The Dick Act is codified at 10 USC 31, and was amended in
1908, apparently unconstitutionally, then again in 1916 to
clear the way to send the "militia" to fight WWI. What
they were doing there in the early 1900's which resulted
in the nice factoid concerning the unorganized militia,
(which the enemy within wants US to believe is some
patriot myth), was dicking around with federalization or
federal control of the independent State's National Guards
(organized state militias) to draft them into federal
*foreign* service in absolute violation of the
constitutional prohibition. The subversive "federal trough"
carrot was clearly already at work then.
You can research archives for yourself here:
https://www.archives.gov/research/gui...roups/168.html
https://www.archives.gov/legislative/...4-militia.html
Here is a bit of accurate history on the Act, as applied
to our main subject:
"After the Spanish-American war of 1898 federal defense
policymakers, assisted by a group of retired professional
military officers, began to lobby for changing the state
militia system. Secretary of War Elihu Root initiated the
program of reorganization in the military establishment,
resulting in the passage of The Dick Act in 1903. The Dick
Act signified the beginning of the demise of the old,
essentially state-controlled, system. The Act required the
states to submit to numerous federal requirements
regarding the training, housing, and equipping of the
state militias. The Dick Act was the first in a series of
moves by Congress, that made the states offers they
couldn't refuse: 'free' training and equipment in exchange
for relinquishing control. The states happily complied.
(cf.: 'The rich rule over the poor. The borrower is
servant to the lender.' Proverbs, 22:7)
On January 3, 1916, President Wilson further diminished
the powers of the People as a Militia under Title 32
U.S.Code. This Act authorized the use of the newly
constituted 'National Guard' to serve beyond the borders
of the United States. The inability to order the militia
beyond the borders of the United States arose from the
fact that the role of militias was defensive. However, the
1908 Act was clearly a violation of the Constitution, a
fact that did not escape the attention of the Judge
Advocate General of the United States Army nor the United
States Attorney General, both of whom acknowledged this
portion of the Act unconstitutional. See United States War
Department, Digest of Opinions of the Judge Advocate
General of the Army: 1912-1940 644 (1942).
Undeterred, Congress passed another National Defense Act
in 1916 as America was gearing up to become involved in
WWI, the war that made the world 'Safe for Democracy' (or
communism, as the case may be). Among the increased
requirements imposed upon the states (and the Regular Army
who had to administer these requirements) Congress devised
a clever way to sidestep the Constitutional prohibition
against foreign use of militia troops: President Wilson
was authorized to draft state Guard members into federal
service as reserve troops. For its part, the Supreme Court
upheld this constitutional end-run in Arver v. U.S., 245
U.S. 366 (191 (ruling that the power to draft members of
the National Guard into the Regular [standing] Army, as
well as the power to compel civilians to render military
service, was granted to the President by the
Constitution). Thereafter, President Wilson began drafting
whole regiments into the Reserves. Furthermore, the
National Defense Act, as a condition precedent to the
receipt of federal funds, forced the states to cede most
of whatever control over the militia that remained,
including the constitutional prerogative to appoint
officers to command the militia."
And so, in the course of time, in a specifically seditious
epoch of our national history where errant servants and
high treason were concerned, (think: Federal Reserve Act),
a once proud and free American National People became rich
men's cannon fodder once more, and re-joined the serfdom
of their European counterparts, to be mustard gassed,
blown apart, and machine-gunned down on foreign shores, as
the catalyst to the desired formation of the League Of
Nations, (not to mention armaments and banking
profiteering), an earlier version of the UN/IMF we find
ourselves subjugated to at present. Remember that the
"Independent Treasury Act", the "Trading With The Enemy
Act", etc., (for those who have a clue), were contemporary
with all this.
Now fast forward to a case in 2005 which got NO publicity
I am aware of, where Governor Rendall, Senators Spectre
and Santorum sued none other than Secretary Rumsfeld in US
District Court to keep the 111th Fighter Wing, and won,
among other reasons, because the Secretary failed to
obtain approval of the Governor prior to "deactivating"
the wing group, in violation of at least two federal
statutes. The plaintiff's actually alleged violation of
the Militia Clause of the Constitution initially, and
after a little deal making behind the curtain, retracted
that to avoid embarrassing the Executive and the Judicial.
The Dick Act comes up, and is revealing, including what
they were doing with Warner's move on Posse Comitatus and
state's control of the Guard signed into law this Fall.
https://66.102.7.104/custom?q=cache:L...61159273465975
Now this is U.S. District Court dicta, written in 2005,
with more at the link above:
"Two hundred and fifty years ago, in 1755, the
Pennsylvania Assembly passed the first Militia Act, which
formally authorized a volunteer militia. 6Id. The modern
National Guard dates back to 1903, when Congress, acting
pursuant to the Militia Clause of the Constitution, passed
the Dick Act. Perpich v. Depâ??t of Defense, 496 U.S. 334,
342(1990).
The Dick Act: divided the class of able-bodied male
citizens between 18 and 45 years of age into an"organized
militia" to be known as the National Guard of the several
States, and the remainder of which was then described as
the"reserve militia," and which later statutes have termed
the "unorganized militia."
Id. In 1916, the National Defense Act federalized the
National Guard, providing that the Army of the United
States consists of"the Regular Army, the Volunteer Army .
. . [and] the National Guard while in the service of the
United States . . . ." Id. at343 n.15. The National
Defense Act "required every guardsman to take a dual oath
â?? to support the Nation as well as the States and to
obey the President as well as the Governor â?? and
authorized thePresident to draft members of the Guard into
federal service." Id.at 343. State control of National
Guard units when not in federal service was of special
importance to Congress when it considered the 1933
National Guard Bill, which amended the National Defense
Act.
Although the National Defense Act allowed members of
theNational Guard to be drafted into the Regular Army, the
Act did not provide for continuity in structure of
National Guard units when their members were drafted,
leading to significant problems during,and immediately
after, World War I:
Because of the fact that the National Guard was
administered under the militia clause of the Constitution,
it had to be drafted for the World War notwithstanding the
fact that every officer and man in the organization had
volunteered for service.
The units and organizations, some of them dating back to
Revolutionary War period, were ruthlessly destroyed and
the individuals were organized into new war strength
organizations.H.R. Rep. No. 73-141, at 2 (1933)."
The greatest flaw in Vierra's above work, of course, is
the FACT he well knows that today literally every unit,
federal, state, county and local, of what passes for
"government" is de facto and distinctly not de jure, due
their funding by Special Drawing Rights of the
UN/IMF/World Bank through its fiscal depository agent
(U.S.), The Federal Reserve, and the de facto
Unconstitutional non-independent "Treasury" headed by none
other than the "Governor" of the IMF/World Bank. NONE of
them can fund or task their daily "missions" absent the
"federal" hog trough, and as such cannot be trusted with
the Citizen Militia or the fates of those courageous and
patriotic enough to organize and participate, nor be
trusted with assigning their missions, when the
Constitutions have been overthrown in practice by the
various states of declared Executive emergency.
God bless, Jack, and feel free to copy/distribute the
above information. Just please credit "a legal researcher
I know" and NOT "Paul Hiatt", thanks. Hope all is well
with you and yours.
Paul
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:47:07 -0700
"Jack Venrick" <jacksranch@skynetbb.com>
wrote:
>To: Property Rights Groups and Freedom Foundations
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>Dale Pond of https://www.svpvril.com/
is asking does
>anyone live in or near Denver who can look this up for
>us, see below?
>
>
>
>Jack Venrick
>Enumclaw, Washington
>www.freedomforallseasons.org
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Dale Pond
>To: undisclosed-recipients:
>Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 5:13 AM
>Subject: The Dick Act of 1902
>
>
>There appears to be a law on the books that prohibits the
>federal government from using the National Guard in any
>way except "to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress
>insurrection and repel invasion". I was able to find
>multiple copies online of the same article but not the
>original law. There is a Dick Act of 1903 which is
>exactly opposite to the 1902 act. This would be a typical
>obfuscation tactic to present an opposite while hiding
>the original. What we need is for someone who is located
>near a government document repository to go look up the
>original act in the original hardcopy files. There is a
>repository in Denver - anyone live in or near Denver who
>can look this up for us?
>
>
>Dick Act 1902
>https://www.angelfire.com/retro/voices/page2.html#1902
>The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of
>Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all
>so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia
>into three distinct and separate entities.
>
>Dick Act 1903
>https://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Mullins1.htm
>In 1903, Congress enacted the Dick Act,[48] which for the
>first time codified certain aspects of the system that
>had developed in rather haphazard fashion under state
>law.[49] Viewed by many as the birth certificate to the
>modern system, the Dick Act represented the first real
>exercise of Congress's long-dormant power to organize the
>militia.[50] Moreover, this Act signified the beginning
>of the demise of the old, essentially state- controlled,
>system.[51]
>