Usufruct Merger


The man-child is the "naked owner", having the reversionary interest in the usufruct as the holder of the Certificate of Live Birth receipt for the INFANT, and upon proof of life of the INFANT not being a decedent.

When the INFANT surrenders this reversionary interest to the usufructuary (State), this constitutes divestiture of the usufruct by Merger (see below).  


Accepting a BILL makes one the Holder in Due Course of an offer.  Merging the obligation and payment contained therein by indorsement constitutes discharge and extinguishment by operation of law.





INSTRUMENTS SIGNED FOR ACCOMMODATION




(see Fair Use excerpt below - buying eBook recommended)



(cf.  pages 981-2)


The BILL is NOT a BILL

So, then what is a “Bill”?  Logically, it must be a request for us to authorize the release of assets held in trust by the Trustee as the payment (asset/credit – liability/debit = 0). This “payment by EQUITABLE TITLE TRANSFER” results in the extinguishment of debt!  Notice that the amount on the bill is a positive number - a CREDIT.  It does not have parentheses around it, or a minus sign in front of it, which commonly indicates a negative number.

This positive number represents an asset that will offset a liability held by the corporation for a commercial transaction.  They just need our authorization (indorsement on the back of the bill) to get ownership of that asset amount so that they can then apply it to discharge the liability on their books for that same amount.  We have the equitable title to that amount. When we indorse the back of a Bill, then the legal and equitable titles to the asset (credit) are now vested in that one piece of paper, and when that indorsed instrument is returned to the party that sent it, then that party is now the Holder in due course of the legal and equitable titles to both the asset and liability amounts for that account and must then EXTINGUISH the debt by operation of law.

The Corporation is already holding both legal and equitable titles to the Liability.  They are also holding the legal title to the Asset as implied by them sending you the Bill (the US Corp and all their sub-corps hold legal title to all assets since 1933 and are Trustees, or agents thereof, per the purpose and intent of the HJR 192, June 5, 1933 TRUST , codified in 31 USC 5118). The only thing they are missing is the Equitable title to the Asset so that they can finally do the discharge to balance the books and extinguish the debt. They have the charge (DEBIT/DEBT) amount – they just need the discharge (CREDIT/ASSET) amount to balance the books to zero.  Having both of the titles for the asset/credit amount now allows them to use that asset/credit amount to perform their duty as Trustee to extinguish (discharge) the Liability/Debit (debt) amount by operation of law – the  trust laws that are invoked when the legal and equitable titles are merged.  

Boris's article entitled "Equitable right to setoff" has related material supporting the above.


No comments:

Post a Comment