New Hampshire Bill Introduced to Re-Instate ORIGINAL 13th Amendment – The Truth Is Coming Out

This is a BIG FOOKING DEAL, folks. Many shills have denied the facts surrounding the original 13th Amendment barring those with Titles of Nobility, as in “Attorney”, from serving in public office. You know, because they were known to be self-serving PUKES, agents of the banking cartel. New Hampshire is the first that I know of that has placed the fact of the matter into the public record.

Times they are a changin’…..FAST.

I searched to see if anyone has posted this already and didn’t see anything so….

Here it is:



AN ACT recognizing the original Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

SPONSORS: Rep. Tremblay, Rock 4; Rep. Baldasaro, Rock 5; Rep. Christiansen, Hills 37

COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs


This bill recognizes the original Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

1 Preamble and Statement of Intent. The general court hereby finds that:

I. In 1810, a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibited titles of nobility and which later became known as the original Thirteenth Amendment, was introduced, passed both houses of Congress, and was sent to the states for ratification. On December 9, 1812, shortly after ratification by Virginia, New Hampshire became the thirteenth state to ratify the amendment. The amendment was therefore ratified by the requisite number of states and became Article XIII of the United States Constitution.

II. During the War Between the States, otherwise known as the Civil War, the country was under martial law, and all executive orders made by President Lincoln were, in effect, law. After the war, laws made during that period were to be abated; yet, vestiges of martial law remained and presidents continued to write executive orders.

III. The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, otherwise known as the Act of 1871, created a corporation in the District of Columbia called the United States of America. The act revoked prior legislation relative to the district’s municipal charter and, most egregiously, led to adoption of a fraudulent constitution in which the original Thirteenth Amendment was omitted.

IV. Today, what appears to the public as the United States Constitution is not the complete document, as it was never lawfully amended to remove the Thirteenth Amendment. Instead, the document presented as the United States Constitution is merely a mission statement for the corporation unlawfully established in the Act of 1871.





Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS
  • H. C. Tansey

    You betcha! This is a big deal. Great find! Keep up your awesome work.

  • robertsgt40

    It wasn’t the civil war or war between the states. It was the war of northern aggression.

    • frphx

      Where the american occupying soldiers @ fort Sumpter were shot at and over run by the peaceful confederate attackers. U betcha.
      I ain’t payin more tax to yankees and I damn sure ain’t givin up the labor force that I bought and paid for.

      • robertsgt40

        Your ignorance of history speaks volumes.

      • David Johnson

        frphx, you nailed it! You got everything on the surface perfect. You never saw or read about the whole rest of that iceberg!!

    • David Johnson

      It was, in fact, the war of northern aggression. What’s missing from the publicized version of the Bill is what the BAR stripped from it after it was introduced to the New Hampshire House/General Court.

      OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES CORPORATION is a separate, private corporation of BAR Attorneys, who craft specific wording in the Bills to benefit themselves. The BAR Attorneys in elected government are no more. It’s an elected membership to a foreign corporation called UNITED STATES, which was known as the British Virginia Company. The bankers and their attorneys are the occupiers in the District of Columbia. They fomented both sides of the war. Both the northerners and the southerners were victims. It had NOTHING to do with slavery at all. Rhode Island was practically the slave running capitol of the continent. Almost all of the slave owners were not of the heritage that you might think.

      Today, U.S. citizens are still operating under martial law and war powers because U.S. citizens are the enemy. Search Trading With The Enemy Act and the amendment that FDR unlawfully slipped in there. YOU are the enemy by consent!

      • robertsgt40

        Correct. The north had placed a 30% tariff on imports from europe. Little of that money came south. Sumpter was attacked because its where tariffs were collected. The war was about money.

        • David Johnson

          The north was squeezing the south JUST LIKE the U.S. did with Japan, who also tried to get rid of the bankers.

          • robertsgt40

            Yup. Same tactic being used in ME on Iran. Sadly, history is written by the victors.

          • shropster

            I imagine that you’re referring to 1941, during most which of when FDR committed acts of war against Japan. FDR wanted to get us into war to save Stalin’s rear end.

          • dwjoae

            All wars are bankster’s wars, and the War of Northern Aggression was fomented by the Jesuits, as usual.

        • shropster

          Ft. Sumpter was also in the territorial waters of South Carolina and was situated to control the imports and exports of the CSA’s largest and busiest port. Even so, the fort wasn’t fired upon until three ships with supplies and reinforcements were seen headed South for the fort.

    • Michael Fernandez

      Correct, it was the “War of Northern Aggression,” though it could also be called “The War of Federal Aggression;” a war which may be repeated in the not too distant future.

  • Magnus Regnant

    Whether any wish to recognize the empirical facts associated, which led to the Armed Conflict commonly referred to as the War between the North & South, will be determined upon your own research into who sold whom to whom.

    Many in the U.S.A. are taught by agencies of U.S., that the conflict was over slavery. But the real issues were more germane to States’ Rights. Slavery was only used as the tool to destroy such Rights. And by doing so, has historically led to further destruction of our natural absolute rights to which All Walks of Life are equally entitle.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t support slavery under any guise whatsoever. But lets let history lay the burden of slavery upon those who sold the slaves, not who bought them. For, if you do this, the sellers will always be laughing all the way to the bank, while you continue to burden their guilt via words of art to deceive you, into believing reparation lies with you! Believe me, it doesn’t. And I can prove this simply by providing the Treaties executed by the Emperor of Morocco, who was singularly responsible for the wholesale depopulation of entire African Nations throughout their history. Just start with the treaty executed between the U.S and this infamous emperor, executed in 1786, to determine the facts for yourself.

    As far as the South was concerned, slavery was not the issue. Just read the Constitution of the Confederate States of America. Therein, it states that slavery shall not exist, within the States confederated thereby!

    So, having the real original 13th Amendment restored ((after your Commander-In-Chief (Lincoln), ripped it out by simply replacing it with another more pliable to his ends as attorney/esquire himself, only secured for the British Crown, the continued ties to servicing alleged debt due, according to treaties adopted between the British Crown & the U.S.)), may mean the Republic for which we have been taught, might have a reasonable chance of surviving another century.

    But it really depends on whether the British Crowns banking institution for servicing the alleged claimed debt due (Federal Reserve System) by the U.S., is dissolved.

    As they say,

    Your people. Your money. Your law. Your choice!

    Most graciously ‘In Honor We Trust’

  • aaheart

    The final ratification by Virginia was in 1819 when copies of the ratification were sent to Washington and published by the State of Virginia. President Madison was an Esq. at the time and so was the Secretary of State, an attorney with the title, “Esquire,” two whom the notice of ratification was delivered. The Titles of Nobility Amendment was published and republished many times, even in the Illinois law books that Lincoln would have had to have read. In fact, in his speech intended to introduce himself to the Republican bigwigs in NYC, he specifically proclaimed that he upheld the Constitution and its 12 amendments, obviously signalling that he did not wish to acknowledge the 13th Amendment known as the Titles of Nobility Amendment. They liked this rough hewn lawyer from the boondocks and he was nominated to be the Republican candidate in the election of 1860.

    Because the southern delegations walked out of Congress without establishing a time of reconvening, technically the Constitutional Republic was ended and Lincoln ruled by his War Powers and Executive Orders. This was never resolved, nor was the Congress legally and formally reconvened. After the war was won the Confederate states were occupied by the US Army and forced to ratify the 14th Amendment in 1868 which removed citizenship from the States and provided Federal protection for a new class of national citizen replacing the Sovereign Citizen of Sovereign States.

    In 1871 the Organic Act founded on Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, a municipal government was created for the Federal Territory, Columbia. After several revisions it finally settled on a de facto plutocracy that grew out of that niche in the Constitution to metastasize until it had totally swallowed the Constitutional Republic, using the Federal Government as the beast that created empire and Obama. Today, Obama is the CEO of the Federal Government and the Congress is the “Board of Directors” for a corporation that is not held to the provisions of the Constitution.

    The much larger problem for those who still aspire to freedom in America is not the TONA, the Original Thirteenth Amendment, but the Federal Government that has become the cancerous tumor that has overwhelmed the Constitutional Republic. This is how Obama can claim to have dictatorial powers — he is not the President of the United States of America; he is the CEO of the US Corporation, of the Federal Territories and foreign to the principles intended by the founders. Ths is why Obama would have no difficulty with his eligibility and why he seems untouchable. The Constitutional Presidency succumbed decades ago. Only a barren facade has remained, the form within which Aristotle warned another function could take hold unnoticed.

    • dax.inventor

      Slavery is probably the worst condition a human being can live under.
      How can anybody think about a 13th Amendment if all men and women in their country are not free.
      Does this mean that because a person is not free that they have no rights at all ?
      Where was their a 13th Amendent for slaves ?
      Arrogance of this magnitude, deserves a recall.
      Maybe the hundreds of thousands of killed off Native Americans needed a 13th Amendment also ?
      How in the world did our world reach such deep levels angular madness ?
      Who are we ?
      Better yet, what are we ?

  • Jim E.

    I thought it primarily kept Lawyers, who were considered part of the judiciary, from serving in the Legislature. Why? Separation of Powers!!

  • Meathead Rob Lowe