United States Notes in the form of Federal Reserve Notes

[aksis]

Someone was asking me about what I meant by "United States Notes in the form of Federal Reserve Notes" in another thread. Since this seems to be a question many ask, have asked, and will likely ask again, it is hoped this thread will address the question in a very simple manner.

To start, (for those who may not know), the Federal Reserve System is "private," while the Treasury of the United States is "public".

For some more perspective, (as some may not even be aware that there is such a thing as a United States Note), take a quick look at what the US Treasury site, "Treasury's Learning Vault - FAQs: Currency" has to say, (in relevant part - emphasis added):

QUESTION: What are United States Notes and how are they different from Federal Reserve notes?

United States Notes (characterized by a red seal and serial number) were the first national currency, authorized by the Legal Tender Act of 1862 and began circulating during the Civil War. The Treasury Department issued these notes directly into circulation, and they are obligations of the United States Government. ...

Both United States Notes and Federal Reserve Notes are parts of our national currency and both are legal tender [but only United States Notes are "lawful money" - Statutes at Large: 37th Conngress. Sess. 2, Chap 33, page 345, Feb 25th 1862].

They circulate as money in the same way. However, the issuing authority for them comes from different statutes. ...

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 authorized the production and circulation of Federal Reserve notes. Although the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) prints these notes, they move into circulation through the Federal Reserve System [The Treasury NOES NOT issued these notes directly into circulation]. They [Federal Reserve notes] are obligations of both the Federal Reserve System and the United States Government. ...

http://www.treas.gov/education/faq/c...l-tender.shtml

Now, as many people are unaware, the Federal Reserve Act §16 (as amended and codified at 12 USC §411) says this about Federal Reserve Notes:

§ 411. Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption

Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank.

When Federal Reserve Notes are taken into a Federal Reserve Bank to be redeemed in lawful money per 12 USC 411 (from what many have posted at suijuris.net forums and elsewhere - and which you can find out for your self by taking a few Federal Reserve Notes to your bank and demanding/asking they be redeemed in "lawful money"), the bank usualy gives people back more Federal Reserve Notes... so they must have been redeemed or the bank has broken the law.

In simplicity, "United States Notes in the form of Federal Reserve Notes," is just a way to say that, regarding Federal Reserve Notes, only the "obligations of the United States" are being recognized/acknowledged/passed; Use of public money by right, as opposed to the use of private credit by contract. It might be better expressed as "redeemed Federal Reserve Notes," rather then "United States Notes in the form of Federal Reserve Notes."

While the Notes (the physical paper and ink) are obviously not envelopes, this metaphor should serve to illustrate the point further (USNs in the form of FRNs):

Take 2 envelopes and on one write "public money - [United States Note] - 1 Dollar" and on the other write "private credit [Federal Reserve Note] - 1 Dollar".

Now, collect all the Statutes and other subject matter relating specificaly to public money [i.e. gold, silver, other coins, United States Notes] and place it in the envelope titled "public money - [United States Note] - 1 Dollar".

Next, collect all the Statutes and other subject matter relating specificaly to private credit [i.e. the Federal Reserve system, Federal Reserve Notes] and place that in the envelope titled "private credit - [Federal Reserve Note] - 1 Dollar".

The information contained in each envelope is obviously very different. Granted, they both are held to having the same value, but the point being that the equation used to achieve the sum is not the same. i.e.:

a+b*c=1
x+y*z=1

Note: While both sums in the above equations are the same, 1, the variables and the unknown operator "*" in the equations are not.

Now (if the Notes were envelopes), when the envelope titled "private credit - [Federal Reserve Note] - 1 Dollar" are taken into a Federal Reserve Bank to be redeemed in lawful money per 12 USC 411:

§ 411. Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption

Federal reserve notes... shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand... at any Federal Reserve bank.

... and since the bank usualy gives people back more Federal Reserve Notes (and banks don't break the law right?) they must now be "redeemed Federal Reserve Notes," that is to say — in line with this medaphore — all the subject matter in the "private credit - [Federal Reserve Note] - 1 Dollar" envelope would have been removed and replaced with the subject matter contained in the "public money - [United States Note] - 1 Dollar" envelope... and then given back to the redeemer.

So while it still says "Federal Reserve Note" on the face of it, it is treated like public money rather then private credit because it has been redeemed.

In fact, since you can't really tell, I just presume that any time some one gives me a Federal Reserve Note that it has already been redeemed.



It should also be mentioned that this regards what is called "money of exchange," as opposed to "money of account."



Regarding "money of account," many people, when depositing or cashing checks, are now using what has been appropriatly termed a "non-endorsement". Here are a couple of examples of the verbiage of the non-endorsment[s] being used on the back of checks:

Deposited for credit on account or exchanged for non-negotiable Federal Reserve Notes of face value. All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice.

[signed:] True Name dba FIRST MIDDLE LAST

Credited to account in, or exchanged for, lawful money per 12 USC 411. All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice.

[signed:] True Name dba FIRST MIDDLE LAST

This way their account is credited with lawful money rather then private credit.

For more info on why people would do this and for some direct experiences people have had:

http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/convincing.html

Public Money by Right; Direct experiences please

There is also a video that David Merrill (the man who I learned the phrase "United States Notes in the form of Federal Reserve Notes" from), has taken the time to produced:

Public Money vs. Private Credit

Magnanimously,

Christopher Theodore: Rhodes

[netwrkranger]

Some say that the US Treasury Department was eliminated in 1921? 1929? It was replaced by the US Department of Treasury.

What are you thoughts on the questions posed above?

Regards,
netwrkranger

[aksis]

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

Some say that the US Treasury Department was eliminated in 1921? 1929? It was replaced by the US Department of Treasury.

What are you thoughts on the questions posed above?

Regards,
netwrkranger

netwrkranger;

Who says that?
Where is the evidence of that?
Is that on topic or would it be better (*hint* *hint*) to take that discussion to a new thread? ;-)

Magnanimously,

Christopher Theodore: Rhodes

[netwrkranger]

I thought it was germane to the thread in at least a minor capacity, but if you would rather I take the question to another thread, I shall oblige.

Regards,
netwrkranger

[aksis]

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

I thought it was germane to the thread in at least a minor capacity, but if you would rather I take the question to another thread, I shall oblige.

Regards,
netwrkranger

Only if it is true... and I haven't seen anything that would convince me of that.

Further, an attempt to prove it is true would be WAY off topic and would detract from both topics.

Thus, the suggestion to do that in another thread... thanks for doing that.

I look forward to reviewing the evidence of that claim.

Magnanimously,

Christopher Theodore: Rhodes

[sucker4lush]

All that work just to say what David Merril has already said ad nauseum?

What we need is some proof that redeeming FRN's for USN's- redeeming private credit for public money- is taking place somewhere besides your mind.

Maybe all us believers here could get together one day and change the whole united States money system into public money. We could meet at the bank. We could pool our FRN's together and transform them into USN's. And when the bank gives us more FRN's... redeem those too... and repeat. Country saved!

[aksis]

Originally Posted by sucker4lush

All that work just to say what David Merril has already said ad nauseum?

Just putting it into my own words as I had been asked what "I" meant... and as far as it being taken to a sicking extent (ad nauseam).. that's your opinion.

Originally Posted by sucker4lush

What we need is some proof that redeeming FRN's for USN's- redeeming private credit for public money- is taking place somewhere besides your mind.

Not really. What you need is proof that it is not only not taking place in your mind but not taking place, that is to say, that it - redeemption of Federal Reserve Notes for lawful money - is not taking place.

Then you can file a suit against the bank (and officers thereof) that didn't redeem the Federal Reserve Note for lawful money.

Originally Posted by sucker4lush

Maybe all us believers here could get together one day and change the whole united States money system into public money. We could meet at the bank. We could pool our FRN's together and transform them into USN's. And when the bank gives us more FRN's... redeem those too... and repeat. Country saved!

People have a right to contract, to make use of that private credit system.

You can stop at any time, like many already have.

There is no need to "pool our FRN's together and transform them into USN's" or do it as a "group project," due to the fact that it as valid if only one was doing it as if there were 100 million people doing it.

Magnanimously,

Christopher Theodore: Rhodes

[sucker4lush]

We're not talking about validity- obviously redeeming lawful money, whether by 1 person or 100, is valid- we're talking about effectiveness... right?

Effectiveness at achieving what? Anyone, anyone...?

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by sucker4lush

All that work just to say what David Merril has already said ad nauseum?

What we need is some proof that redeeming FRN's for USN's- redeeming private credit for public money- is taking place somewhere besides your mind.

Maybe all us believers here could get together one day and change the whole united States money system into public money. We could meet at the bank. We could pool our FRN's together and transform them into USN's. And when the bank gives us more FRN's... redeem those too... and repeat. Country saved!

Hey Sucker4lush;

Where have you been? I have missed your near-poetic critical thinking!

Here is another mental model for you all - in addition to the point of my new video - which is that all required by law is to make the demand...

Supposing somebody accepts private credit for $500 and then gives that cash to me. Is it lawful money? In the sense of Gary Rickman's paychecks according to the Ninth Circuit court, it is.

It is lawful money in my hand because the casher of the paycheck has endorsed his substance to bond the cash form of currency. It is lawful money just like in Rickman.

So another way to look at it is that Gary Rickman-types have already accrued a tax liability on the cash in hand. My boss paying me in cash, if he failed to non-endorse the paycheck for the $500 cash has already settled up with the Fed - therefore I do not have to. That would be double-enrichment for the Fed to demand it - illegal.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[Levi Philos]

While the initial post is well organized and makes the point, I am with Sucker4Lush.

My point of view is that centralized money and centralized power are a symbiotic pair. No matter how centralized money is created, the control freaks will be found at the levers.

I would like to see all legal tender laws abolished (good luck with that); barring that approach I would like to see people understanding money as a communication. Such a paradigm shift means you would see multiple formats running in competition - Hayek's thesis in DENATIONALIZATION OF MONEY.

Try to imagine e-gold, ALD, silver coins, gold coins, Ithaca Hours, LETS systems - all running concurrently at competition with people choosing whatever works best at the moment.

Levi Philos