The Foundation for the Destruction of the Republic of Utah
Has been Laid by the Unrighteousness of the Lawyers and judges.
Utah Constitution Article I, Section 27
“Frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is essential to the security of individual rights and the perpetuity of free government.”
Constitution for the State of Utah, Article I, Section 27
The legal profession has done a major disservice to the people of Utah in passing UCS 76-1-105, abolishing the common law. This code section is not only unconstitutional but is also a violation of their oath of office and their allegiance. It is time for the people to look at this “jewel” in the crown of the lawyers as they extend their power over the people in violation of our heritage in the common law and our liberties.
As the Utah State Senate opened up its 2014 session, Senator Wayne Niederhauser passed out a token to the members with the inscription quoting Article I, Section 27 of the Utah State Constitution, hopefully to remind the legislature of its responsibility to remember and implement them into their drafting legislation. I found this very appropriate and posed the question to the Senator for a list of those “fundamental” principles he felt important. He has yet to respond.
Just to help the State legislature out, one of the most fundamental of the fundamental principles is found in the U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 4, and that is: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; . . .”
To reinforce this principle: “The sovereignty and the republican form of government of each state is guaranteed by the constitution; . . .” A Citizen of America, Noah Webster, October 17, 1787: (The Debate on the Constitution, Part I.) “The Constitution consists of seven separate articles. The first three establish the three branches of our government–the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. The fourth article describes matters pertaining to states, most significantly the guarantee of a republican form of government to every state of the Union.” Ezra Taft Benson, The Constitution, A Heavenly Banner, (1986).
Another important common law principle: “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” (2 Cor. 13:1) This constitutional charge has been forgotten and violated as the State legislature passed Utah Code Section 76-1-105. “Common law crimes abolished. Common law crimes are abolished and no conduct is a crime unless made so by this code, other applicable statute or ordinance.”
This one act of the State legislature has a two prong effect on the charge given to the State of Utah by the U.S. Constitution; first it weakens the foundation of our republican form of government. Second, it causes an invasion on to the land a jurisdiction foreign to our state constitution and a grievances spoken out about in the Declaration of Independence: “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation: . . .” All of this civil law legislation the State legislature is playing with is nothing but “pretended”.
“For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments: . . . .” (Declaration of Independence)
The injection of the civil law system of government changes our republican form of government into a democracy and our natural rights become subject to the “will of the people”. “In democracy . . . there are commonly tumults and disorders. . . . Therefore a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth.” Noah Webster
This pretended legislation has been called on the carpet several times by the courts, one example from the opinion of Justice Chase in Calder v. Bull, 3 Dallas 386, 388, 389 (1798); “An act of legislature (for I cannot call it a law) contrary to the great first principles of the social compact, cannot be considered a rightful exercise of legislative authority. The obligation of a law in governments established on express compact, and on republican principles, must be determined by the nature of the power, on which it is founded. A few instances will suffice to explain what I mean. . . .; a law that destroys, or impairs, the lawful private contracts of citizens; a law that makes a man a judge in his own cause; or a law that takes property from A and gives it to B. It is against all reason and justice, for a people to entrust a legislature with such power; and therefore, it cannot be presumed that they have done it. . . . To maintain that our Federal, or State, legislature possesses such powers, if they had not been expressly restrained; would in my opinion, be a political heresy, altogether inadmissible in our free republican governments.
“. . . With very few exceptions, the advocates of such laws were stimulated by ambition, or personal resentment, and vindictive malice. . . .”
“This fundamental principle flows from the very nature of our free republican governments, that no man should be compelled to do what the law does not require.” Calder vs. Bull, 3 Dallas 386, 388 As Justice Chase points out there is a difference between a “law” and “pretended legislation”. The State legislature should keep this in mind as they start passing bills intended to be a code of conduct that has no effect on the people in general. One simple example that is thrown at us is the seat-belt law. Now the use of the seat belt is a good thing, the problem is this is not within the scope of government to enforce it upon the people. All laws that have an adverse effect on the public are covered under the common law and are known by all and have a remedy in the law of the land.
Speaking of the law of the land, not every bill that is passed on by the legislature or congress is the law of the land. Read carefully the wording accompanying that phrase in the constitution. “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; . . . ., shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” (Article VI)
Only those laws made “in pursuance thereof . . . shall be the supreme Law of theLand;. . . ” The Constitution of the United States recognizes only those laws that protect and secure our natural rights. That recognize the first principles of the sovereignty of the people, the proper line of authority delegated to government and the the territorial features of legislation. “All legislation is prima facie territorial.’ American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 213 U.S. 347, 357. These as well as others are common law principles.
“An important canon of construction is that constitutions must or at least may be
construed with reference to common law, although the reverse is not necessarily true since, in most respects, the federal and state constitutions did not repudiate but cherished the established common law.
“Provisions of the Federal Constitution have been interpreted by reference to the
common law in existence at the time of the writing of that document. It has been said that without reference to this common law the language of the federal constitution could not be understood. This is because the United States Constitution and the plan of government of the United States were founded on the common law as established in England at the time of the Revolution. Therefore, it is a general rule that phrases in the Bill of Rights taken from the common law must be construed in reference to the latter.” (Emphasized areas taken from 16 AM JUR, 2nd ed., Sec. 74. The others from an earlier edition.)
Justice James Iredell brings out a point respecting the foundation for the constitutions of the individual states: “The only principles of law, then, that can be regarded, are those common to all the States. I know of none such, which can affect this case, but those that are derived from what is properly termed ‘the common law,’ a law which I presume is the ground-work of the laws in every State in the Union, and which I consider, so far as it is applicable to the Peculiar circumstances of the country, and where no special act of Legislation controls it, to be in force in each State, as it existed in England, (unaltered by any statute) at the time of the first settlement of the country.” (Chisholm v. Georgia, p. 435) The passing of UCS 76-1-105 has altered the constitution for the State of Utah.
The source for our heritage in the common law and our republican form of government is found in christian principles. Noah Webster observed this: “[T]he Christian religion, in its purity, is the basis, or rather the source of all genuine freedom in government. … and I am persuaded that no civil government of a republican form can exist and be durable in which the principles of that religion have not a controlling influence.” (Defining Noah Webster: Mind and Morals in the Early Republic”, (New York: University Press of America, 1990), p. 253, to James Madison on October 16, 1829.
“[O]ur citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament, or the Christian religion.” Noah Webster, United States Founding Father, Revolutionary War Soldier, “History of the United States”, (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), p. 6.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams, 1798
These principles are not a violation of the first amendment that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, . . .” I think you will find that the christian principles are common to all of the major religions of the world, do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Code Section 76-1-105 needs the immediate attention of the legislature to repeal this section, give the people the correct education about a republican form of government and revamp the law to reflect our common law principles.
To the Utah State legislature and Governor Herbert, please take to heart the counsel of Ezra Taft Benson: “To all who have discerning eyes. It is apparent that the republican form of government established by our noble forefathers cannot long endure once the fundamental principles are abandoned. Momentum is gathering for another conflict — a repetition of the crisis of two hundred years ago…. The issue is the same that precipitated the great pre-mortal conflict — will men be free to determine their own course of action, or must they be coerced?” The Constitution, a Heavenly Banner