Everything

I Have

Was TheIR$


Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., Mr.

(1919-1979)

* * * * * * * *


OPEN LETTER

Everyone should be concerned about the future. The condition of the world, at this time, calls for many decisions. Decisions should only be made after careful consideration of the knowledge of what the true condition is and how it can effect you individually.

Truth, today, is a very scarce "commodity." Forcing yourself to accept only the truth, the whole truth, and nothing except the truth is a difficult decision - I know - I recently became committed to that doctrine.

Many people are partially prepared for a world-wide monetary collapse. They have acquired private ownership of various precious metals and gems and are confident that they will survive. Unfortunately that is not the total solution.

Tangible private property may well make them wealthy during the monetary collapse and its aftermath; but during the interval between now and the collapse most of the non-bank public will lose everything. It is that period of time, for which hardly anyone is preparing. It is during that interval that circumstances will develop which no one can accurately predict. It is that period for which only the absolute truth can best prepare anyone. Any errors in decision will be understood when the collapse occurs, but then it will be too late to make corrections. What must be done, must be done now; we are in that period.

If my message conflicts with every other voice you hear, take heed and think, truth is always stranger than fiction." Everyone's circumstances differ and one set of decisions cannot fit all.

What I believe may be the solution to the condition of the world is in the following pages. Those pages will expose the basis for and the decisions I have made. What you do is up to you.

THE AUTHOR

* * * * * * * *

TABLE OF CONTENTS


Dear Mr. President: "Can you explain"1
Return to gold or barter might collapse financial system3
Congress furnishes a copy of the Coinage Act of 1792.4
Pursuing the definition of the word DOLLAR.5
Pursuing the LAWFUL PAYMENT PARITY of present-day coinage.7
Lawful payment limit = 25 cents.13
"No further response necessary" Counselor to General Council - Treasury.16
22.68 Grams of Copper-nickel clad coins = one DOLLAR.19
Value is not fixed by any official document.23
"Federal Reserve Notes are themselves lawful money" Federal Reserve.25
No explanation from: Dear Mr. President.28
Appeal to congressman brings form letter.29
"Not enough gold" form letter.31
What is "money?"35
What is a DOLLAR of "money?"36
To whom it may concern - on fining out forms.41
Five questions for Commissioner of I.R.S.42
I.R.S.: "We will answer."45
How much in "my" Social Security Account?46
I request refund of an "my" Social Security withholdings.48
Congressman: "Cannot help you!"51
Sixty days have elapsed - where is ANSWER?52
I request refund of an my "income" tax since June 1968.54
I.R.S.: "We will give all appropriate considerations."60
Additional grounds in support of request for refund.61

* * * * * * * *

Key provisions of the Coinage Act of 1792. 6363
Darryl R. Francis: "Monetized Debt" = INFLATION. 6666
"Two Faces of Debt" "Modern Money Mechanics,." 6767
Gigantic Confidence Game. 6868
Federal Reserve Notes are "COUNTERFEIT." 6969
Monetization of Debt - in the human mind. 7171
Unfunded "paper money" forces indirect barter. 7272
DOLLAR like MERMAID - Well known but non-existent. 7474
What is the 'MONEY OF ACCOUNT' now? 7676
SEIGNIORAGE & No Income - No "income" tax. 7777
Questions for the jury. 7777
We the people have unalienable rights. 7979
Constitutional Articles IV & V . 8080
Details in support of term - 'COUNTERFEIT'. 8383
DOLLAR is an EXPRESSION of measure. 8484
An expression of measure is not an entity. 8585
Counterfeit ISSUERS get everything for nothing. 8686
Why, then, are we "taxed?" 8888
Economists are also mystified. 9090
How can 'they' admit 'IT' was an unconscious act. 9191
Worldwide - the economists do not acknowledge theft. 9292
T R A N S M O G R I F I C A T I O N. 9393
NO Law of SUPPLY & DEMAND. 9494
Founding Fathers on: GOVERNMENT. 9595
Invisible force of government. 9696

* * * * * * * *

John Adams on: "money." 9797
Imaginary "purchasing" power. 9898
May have to reintroduce -- DEATH PENALTY. 9999
James Madison on: "money." 100100
Who, What, Where, When, and Why of the invisible government. 102102
Jamaican Rummy - Fourteen Billion new units created. 103103
"We have awakened forces. . . ." John Connally. 105105
"M 1" what is it really. 110110
"Money" is such a routine part. 111111
Additional documentation of gigantic confidence game. 112112
"M 1" is a "FLOAT." 115115
Aladdin's Lamp - The more they spend, the more they have. 116116
"Demand Deposits" - "Modem Money of Account. 117117
Non-authorized counterfeiting is less costly! 118118
Debts as assets makes bookkeeping a farce. 119119
NATIONAL DEBT - more disastrous than bankruptcy. 120120
Coming?: A new dark ages?121
A practical solution.123
Value vs. parit124
Abolish legal tender.125
HOAX is older than any of us.126
Primary function of unfunded "paper money.127
The NATURE of "money" facilitates.128
INFLATION is ALWAYS one hundred percent.129
The time factor.131
The non-bank public's wealth is stolen throuh fraud.132
How the solution may be.133

* * * * * * * *

Some economic truths135
I.R.S.: "This is a final response. . . ." 138138
Dear Mr. Burke: " . . . .how can a 97% toss be income?"139
Dear I.R.S. Commissioner: ". . . . please reconsider. . . ."143
Dear I.R.S. District Director: ". . . . please reconsider. . . ."148
MAGNA CARTA - Directions to the jury148
The right of the jury to be told of its power. 150
"Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars!" . . . I.R.S 156
Tax Protesters Warned by I.R.S 158

* * * * * * * *

1

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis. Missouri 63138

December 9, 1977

President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. President:

A Federal Reserve "Note" is labeled 'Note (1) and bears a monetary denomination as one 'Dollar', (2) it is accepted as being 'Money', (3) a unit of United States 'Currency', (4) and functions as a 'Bearer Certificate,' (5) for the public's goods and services.

(1) It cannot be a 'Note' since it does not stipulate payment of anything, to anyone, by anyone, at any time!

(2) It is not a 'Dollar'; 'Dollar' is an expression of quantity of silver or gold in coinage, ". . . which shall by law be current as money within the united States. . . ."

(3) It is not 'Money'; 'Money' is an abstract term for a medium of exchange; the paper token cannot be the thing it represents by proxy!

(4) It is not 'Currency'; only a medium of exchange itself can be 'Currency'; the paper token cannot be the thing it represents by proxy!

(5) It is not a 'Bearer Certificate' since it is not a "claim check" on anything on deposit!

Being non-redeemable but accepted as a claim on the public's goods and services it represents a 100% confiscation of the public's wealth without compensation. Can you offer an explanation that will justify this unconstitutional procedure?

A concerned citizen,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

2

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

3


JOHN L. MCCLELLAN, ARK., CHAIRMAN
WARREN G. MAGNUSON, WASH. MILTON R. YOUNG, N. DAK.
JOHN C. STENNIS, MISS. ROMAN L. HRUSKA, NEBR.
JOHN O. PASTORE, R.I. NORRIS COTTON, N.H.
ALAN BIBLE, NEV. CLFFORD P. CASE, NJ.
ROBERT C. BYRD, W. VA. HIRAM L. FONG, HAWAII
GALE W. MCGEE, WYO. EDWARD W. BROOKE, MASS.
MIKE MANSFIELD, MONT. MARK O. HATFIELD, OREO.
WILLIAM PROXMIRE, WIS. TED STEVENS, ALASKA
JOSEPH M. MONTOYA, N. MEX. CHARLES MC. C MATHIAS, JR., MO.
DANIEL K. INOUYE, HAWAII RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, PA.
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, S.C. HENRY BELLMON, OKLA.
BIRCH BAYH, IND.
THOMAS F. EAGLETON, MO.
LAWTON CHILES, FLA.

JAMES R. CALLOWAY
CHIEF COUNSEL AND STAFF DIRECTOR

UNITED STATES SENATE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510

November 14, 1974

Mr. Merrill Jenkins
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

Thank you for your recent letter.

Currency outstanding is backed by the goods and services produced by the economy. While it is clear that an increase in money which exceeds the increase in production will be inflationary, it does not follow that printed money has any less value because it is paper rather than coin, There is no expropriation of wealth in this process. In fact, were we to return to a gold standard or to a barter system, the entire world financial system might collapse.

Sincerely yours,

Thomas F. Eagleton, United States Senator

TFE:ack

cc: Mel Jones

* * * * * * * *

4

HAROLD L. VOLKMER DISTRICT OFFICES:
9TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
FEDERAL BUILDING

MISSOURI ROOM 316

1228 LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-2956

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

VALERIE DAVIS
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515

District Offices:

Room 316
Federal Building
HANNIBAL, MISSOURI 63401
(314) 221-1200

535 ST. FRANCOIS
FLORISSANT, MISSOURI 63031
(314) 837-1688

200 N. 2ND STREET
ST. CHARLES, MISSOURI 63301
(314) 723-1665

September 28, 1977

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

Thank you for your recent request for a copy of the Coinage Act of 1792.

Please find enclosed a copy of your requested Act. which I hope you will find informative pursuant to your research.

If I may be of any further service, please do not hesitate to contact me again.

With best wishes, I remain

Sincerely yours,

Harold L. Volkmer

HLV:sc

* * * * * * * *

5

AM VAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 6, 1977

President
First National Bank of St. Charles, Mo.
100 N. Main
St. Charles. Mo. 63301

Dear Ms or Mr:

Please endeavor to give me a clear explanation of what a 'Dollar' is. I am told a 'Dollar' is a unit of United States money of account. I am also told the 'Money of Account' is 'Dollars'. Can there be a dollar's worth of ' Dollars'? Can it be the unit of a thing and the thing itself, at the same time? Could there be a Quart of Quarts or an Ounce of Ounces?

In your expertise as President of B Bank surely you can explain it clearly.

Very truly yours,

Merrill M. E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

6

FIRST NATIONAL BANK of ST. CHARLES, MISSOURI
100 North Main, 5th and First Capital, and Elm & Hawthorne
Established 1863

December 9, 1977 Merrill M. E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.
AMVAC, Inc.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Sir:

In reply to your letter dated December 6, 1977, I have taken the Webster's Dictionary and looked up the words in question, namely, the "dollar" and "money". The dictionary describes the dollar as a unit of value; money is described as a form of token in coin or bank note.

In my understanding, I interpret this to mean that the dollar as a unit of value is exchanged for other values, such as cash purchases, credit sales, etc. Money is just the medium of exchange and is used instead of having to barter for items as in earlier days.

I hope this clarifies your questions regarding the difference between the dollar and money.

Sincerely yours,

Glennon F. Debrecht, Vice President

GFD:jh

* * * * * * * *

7

AMVAC INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 6. 1977

Congressman Harold L. Volkmer
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman:

Some United States token coinage denominations cannot be used to 'lawfully' settle debts over a certain amount. I believe 'Cents' can only be used for up to "Ú" 2,00 and 'Quarters' can only be used for up to "$"20.00. Can you help me to obtain answers to the following:

1. Under the Coinage Act of 1792 what is the maximum single debt that can be settled 'lawfully' with 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted into the present 'legal' token coinage?

2. What would the current commodity value be of the maximum 'legal present token coinage' that 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" can be converted into and used to settle a single debt?

3. Taking into consideration the 97% seigniorage provision of the Coinage Act of 1965, what is the total commodity value of 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted into the present 'legal' token coinage?

Very truly yours,

Merrill M. E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

8

HAROLD L. VOLKMER DISTRICT OFFICES:
9TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
FEDERAL BUILDING

MISSOURI ROOM 316

1228 LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-2956

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

VALERIE DAVIS
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515

District Offices:

Room 316
Federal Building
HANNIBAL, MISSOURI 63401
(314) 221-1200

535 ST. FRANCOIS
FLORISSANT, MISSOURI 63031
(314) 837-1688

200 N. 2ND STREET
ST. CHARLES, MISSOURI 63301
(314) 723-1665

January 9, 1978

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M. R.
AMVAC, Inc.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

Many thanks for your letter requesting information on coinage and the coinage acts.

I have been in contact with the Library of Congress to check on if they can get the information to answer your questions. I will be back with you as soon as I have some information.

With best wishes, I am

Sincerely yours,

Harold L. Volkmer

HLV/jg

THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS

* * * * * * * *

9

HAROLD L. VOLKMER DISTRICT OFFICES:
9TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
FEDERAL BUILDING

MISSOURI ROOM 316

1228 LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-2956

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

VALERIE DAVIS
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515

District Offices:

Room 316
Federal Building
HANNIBAL, MISSOURI 63401
(314) 221-1200

535 ST. FRANCOIS
FLORISSANT, MISSOURI 63031
(314) 837-1688

200 N. 2ND STREET
ST. CHARLES, MISSOURI 63301
(314) 723-1665

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.
AMVAC, Inc.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

I have received the information you requested from the Library of Congress.

I hope you find this information helpful in your interest in this matter.

With best wishes, I am

Sincerely yours,

Harold L. Volkmer

HLV/jg

THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS

* * * * * * * *

10

THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Congressional Research Service
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20540

January 19, 1978

TO: Honorable Harold Volkmer
Attention: Jim Glassen
FROM: American Law Division
SUBJECT: Legal Tender

Reference is made to your inquiry of January 10, 1978, forwarding a letter of your constituent, Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr. in which requests information concerning "lawful'' money and certain provisions of the Coinage Act of 1965. It is presumed that your constituent is requesting information dealing with coins and currencies of the United States which are legal tender and the commodity values of the metal which is contained in the coins minted under the Coinage Act of 1965.

Attached please find those provisions of title 31, United States Code, which set forth the coins and currencies of the United States which are legal tender for the payment of debts, public and private, and the limitations or restrictions thereon.

With respect to the commodity value of metal contained in coins minted under the Coinage Act of 1975, that value would vary from day to day based on the fluctuating market in the metal used. However,

* * * * * * * *

11

CRS-2

we are forwarding herewith a copy of the Coinage Act of 1965, with the 1970 amendments thereto, which set forth the standards and weights for such coins. It would seem that from these standards and weights, Mr. Jenkins should be able to obtain the desired information.

In addition, your constituent may desire to consult title 31 of the United States Code Annotated, In which court decisions construing the statutory provisions dealing with Money and Finance can be found, concerning the Issues or questions presented in his letter. On occasion decisions of courts are helpful in the understanding of statutory provisions .

We hope this material will be helpful. This letter of Mr. Jenkins is enclosed.

Albert M. Perry, Legislative Attorney

* * * * * * * *

12

AMVAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 6, 1977

The Department of The Treasury
Office of the General Counsel
Washington, D.C. 20220
Russell L. Munk, Assistant General Counsel

Dear Sir:

Some United States token coinage denominations cannot be used to settle debts over a certain amount. I believe 'cents' can only be used for up to "$" 2.00 and Quarters can only be used for up to "$" 20.00.

1. Under the Coinage Act of 1792 what is the maximum single debt that can be settled 'lawfully' with 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted into the present 'legal' token coinage?

2. what would the current commodity value be of the maximum 'legal present token coinage' that 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" can be converted into and used to settle a single debt?

3. Taking into consideration the 97% seigniorage provisions of the Coinage Act of 1965, what is the total commodity value of 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted into the present 'legal' token coinage?

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

13

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20220

DEC 29, 1977

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

Your letter of December 6 raises questions about the legal tender character of our coins and currency and the "commodity value" of Federal Reserve notes.

An 1873 act of Congress (codified as 31 U.S. Code §460) made the penny and nickel legal tender for any amount not exceeding 25 cents in any one payment. An 1879 act (31 U.S. Code §459) made the dime, quarter, and half dollar legal tender in sums not exceeding $10. Section 102 of the Coinage Act of 1965 (31 U.S. Code §392) makes all coins and currencies of the United States, including Federal Reserve notes, legal tender. There is no authoritative court decision on the construction to be given these legal tender acts, but rules of statutory construction (and common sense) indicate that the limitations on the use of coins as legal tender contained in the 1873 and 1879 acts are still in force.

Your letter focuses primarily on the lack of a "commodity value" of Federal Reserve notes. Federal Reserve notes have not been backed by gold (or other precious metal) since the 1930's and therefore have no "commodity value," as such. Throughout the world, gold has ceased to play a significant monetary role. See the enclosed background paper. While our currency is not backed by some commodity such as gold, the American economy remains the strongest in the world.

You ask what is the maximum single debt that can be settled lawfully with 2,800 Federal Reserve notes converted into the present legal "token" coinage. Under the 1873 and 1879 acts mentioned above, the maximum single debt that could be settled were these Federal Reserve notes converted into coinage would be 25 cents in any one payment, if pennies and nickels were used, or $10 if dimes, quarters, and half dollars

* * * * * * * *

14

- 2 -

were used. Of course the real value of 2,800 Federal Reserve notes is measured by the goods and services they can buy. If, for example, each of the 2,800 Federal Reserve notes is a $10 bill, the total value of the 2,800 notes is what $28,000 will buy at any given time.

Sincerely,

Henry C. Stockell, Jr., Deputy General Counsel

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.
AMVAC, Inc.
11591 Joslyn Court
Saint Louis, Mo. 63138

Enclosure

* * * * * * * *

15

JEHKINS CONTROLS INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 6, 1977

Department of The Treasury
Fiscal Service
Bureau of Government Financial Operations
Washington, D.C.
Bruce A. Budlong Acting Director, Special Financing Staff

Dear Sir:

In the Interest of Honesty, Truth, and Good Faith would you please answer the following:

1. Under the provisions of the Coinage Act of 1792, what is the maximum single debt that can be settled ºawfully1 with 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted Into the present 'legal' token coinage?

2. What would the current commodity value be of the maximum

"legal present token coinage' that 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" can be converted into and used to settle a single debt?

3. Taking into consideration the 97% seigniorage provisions of the 1965 Coinage Act; what is the total commodity value of 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted into the present 'legal' token coinage?

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

16

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
WASHINGTON DC 20220

January 6, 1978

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

This is in response to your letter of December 6 to Mr. Budlong of the Fiscal Service (which reached my desk today). Your letter of the same date to Assistant General Counsel Munk, which Deputy General Counsel Stockell of this office answered on December 29, raises the same questions. Therefore, no further response is necessary.

Sincerely,

Forest D. Montgomery, Counselor to the General Counsel

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

* * * * * * * *

17

AMVAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 6, 1977

Research Department
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
P.O. Box 442
St. Louis, Missouri 63166

Dear Ms or Mr:

borne United States token coinage denominations cannot be used to lawfully settle debts over a certain amount. I believe 'Cents' can only be used for up to "S" 2.00 and 'Quarters' can only be used for up to "$" 20.00.

1. Under the Coinage Act of 1792 what is the maximum single debt that can be settled 'lawfully' with 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted Into the present 'legal' token coinage?

2. What would the current commodity value be of the maximum 'legal present token coinage' that 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" can be converted into and used to settle a single debt?

3. Taking into consideration the 97% seigniorage provision of the Coinage Act of 1965, what is the total commodity value of 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted into the present 'legal' token coinage?

Very truly yours.

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

18

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
P. O. Box 442
St. Louis. Missouri 63166

F. GARLAND RUSSELL. JR
SEVIOR VICE PRESIDENT
GENERAL COUNSEL AND SECRETARY

December 16, 1977

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M. R
Amvac, Inc.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

This is in reply to your letter of December 6, 1977 concerning the use of coins to settle debts. 31 U.S. Code §392 provides:

"All coins and currencies of the United States (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations), regardless of when coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private, public charges, taxes, duties, and dues."

While 31 U.S. Code §459 providing.

"The silver coins of the united States in existence June 9, 1879, of smaller denominations than $1 shall be a legal tender in all sums not exceeding $10 in full payment of all dues public and private."

and 31 U.S. Code §460 providing,

"The minor coins of the United States shall be a legal tender, at their nominal value for any amount not exceeding 25 cents in any one payment."

have not been repealed, it is my opinion that they have been superseded by 31 U.S. Code §392, which is a later statute and that any coins of the United States are legal tender in any amount.

* * * * * * * *

19

Page 2

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.

December 16, 1977

We are sorry that we do not have information on the current commodity value of the metals in clad coins. However, it may help you in answering that question to know that 31 U.S. Code §391 provides that the cladding shall be 75% copper and 25% nickel and shall weigh not less than 30% of the whole coin, while the core of the coin shall be copper. The weight of clad coins is set at 22, 68 grams per dollar.

Very truly yours,

F. Garland Russell, Jr.

* * * * * * * *

20

AMVAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 6, 1977

Research Department
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
P.O. Box 834
Chicago, Illinois 60690

Dear Ms or Mr:

Some United States token coinage denominations cannot be used to settle debts over a certain amount. I believe "Cents' can only be used for up to "$" 2.00 and 'Quarters' can only be used for up to "$" 20.00.

1. Under the Coinage Act of 1792 what is the maximum single debt that can be settled 'lawfully' with 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted into the present 'legal' token coinage?

2. What would the current commodity value be of the maximum 'legal present token coinage' that 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" can be converted into and used to settle a single debt?

3. Taking into consideration the 97% seigniorage provision of the Coinage Act of 1965, what is the total commodity value of 2800 Federal Reserve "Notes" converted into the present 'legal' token coinage?

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

21

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
230 SOUTH LASALLE STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60690
(312) 322-5322
LEGAL DEPARTMENT

December 20, 1977

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.
AMVAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

This is in partial response to your letter of December 6, 1977, which poses three questions concerning United States coins.

Preliminarily, you should be aware that pennies and nickels (minor coins) are legal tender for any amount not exceeding 25 cents in any one payment.(31 U.S.C. 460) Quarters are not so restricted, as they are not minor coins.

Thus, under your first question, it would appear that the non-minor coin equivalent of Federal Reserve Notes are legal tender for that amount. See also, 31 U.S.C. 392 which specifies that "all coins and currencies of the united States (Including Federal Reserve Notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve Banks and national banking associations) regardless of when coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private, public charges, taxes, duties, and dues."

With regard to your other questions, it is unclear to me what you mean by "commodity value". Perhaps if you elaborated on these questions and cited specific sections of the Acts referred to, I could be of more help.

Also, since you are located in the 8th Federal Reserve District, you may want to address your questions to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

Very truly yours,

William M. Lloyd, Senior Attorney

WML:cwr

* * * * * * * *

22

AMVAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 28, 1977

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
230 South LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60690
Mr. William M. Lloyd, Senior Attorney, Legal Department, Ref.: Yours Dec. 20, 77

Dear Sir:

Buying, selling, and purchasing are all fictitious words in a sense, for in reality, we are an EXCHANGING our 'results of human labor' for the 'results of human labor' of others, (product or service).

When gold and silver certificates were in use they could REDEEM gold and/or silver specie coin worth approximately 90% of the value of the product or service surrendered to obtain the certificates. The Federal Reserve "Notes" in use now, that replaced the gold and silver certificates, can only redeem copper-nickel proxy token coinage worth approximately only 3% of the value of the product or service surrendered to obtain them.

It is the loss of value sustained in using LEGAL-TENDER as opposed to PAYMENT during exchanges of products and/or services for Federal Reserve "Notes" directly that I wish to verify. I believe there was some official verification recently that gave the commodity value of the various present coinage ie:,36(i for the one cent coin and .33i for the dime, etc. Can you obtain an official copy of the document for me?

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

23

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF CHICAGO
230 SOUTH LA SALLE STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60690
(312) 322-5322
LEGAL DEPARTMENT

February 2, 1978

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.
AMVAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

Please excuse my delay in responding to your letter of December 28, 1977, In which you ask for an official copy of a document which verifies the "commodity value" of the various U. S. coins.

You should be advised that no one at this Reserve Bank is aware of any such document. In addition, it is my understanding that the "commodity value" of the coins fluctuates depending on the current market price of the metal components. In other words, the value is not fixed by any official document.

Statutes do establish the contents of clad coins and their dimensions. From the copy of 31 U.S.C. 391, enclosed with this letter, you may be able to determine for yourself the current "commodity value" of the U. S. coins.

Very truly yours,

William M. Lloyd Assistant Counsel'

WML:cwr

* * * * * * * *

24

AMVAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 9, 1977

Honorable Michael Blumenthal
Secretary of the Treasury
Washington, D.C. 20220

Dear Mr. Blumenthal:

A Federal Reserve "Note" is labeled 'Note (1) and bears a monetary denomination as one 'Dollar', (2) it is accepted as being 'Money', (3) a unit of United States 'Currency', (4) and functions as a 'Bearer Certificate,' (5) for the public's goods and services.

(1) It cannot be a 'Note' since it does not stipulate payment of anything, to anyone, by anyone, at any time!

(2) It is not a 'Dollar'; 'Dollar' is an expression of quantity of silver or gold in coinage, ". . . which shall by law be current as money within the united States. . . ."

(3) It is not 'Money'; 'Money' is an abstract term for a medium of exchange; the paper token cannot be the thing it represents by proxy!

(4) It is not 'Currency'; only a medium of exchange itself can be 'Currency'; the paper token cannot be the thing it represents by proxy!

(5) It is not a 'Bearer Certificate' since it is not a "claim check" on anything on deposit!

Being non-redeemable but accepted as a claim on the public's goods and services it represents a 100% confiscation of the public's wealth without compensation. Can you offer an explanation that will justify this unconstitutional procedure?

A concerned citizen,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20951

ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD

January 6, 1978

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.
AMVAC, Inc.
11591 Joslyn Court
Saint Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

This is in response to your letter of December 9, 1977 to the Honorable Michael Blumenthal, Secretary of the Treasury, concerning Federal Reserve notes. Your letter was forwarded to the Board of Governors for reply.

In answer to your questions concerning Federal Reserve notes, a Federal Reserve note is both a note and a dollar. It is a note in the sense that it represents a promise by the United States to pay the stated face amount of the instrument to the bearer on demand in lawful money. It is a dollar in the sense that the value of the note is stated in units of one dollar. The statutory authority for the creation and issuance of Federal Reserve notes is provided by section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act (see 12 O.S.C. S 411). That section provides that Federal Reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, shall be obligations of the United States redeemable in "lawful money" on demand at the Treasury Department in Washington, D.C. or at any Federal Reserve Bank. In this connection, it should be noted that Federal Reserve notes are themselves lawful money. Although not defined by statute, the term "lawful money" is generally regarded as meaning any medium of exchange that freely circulates from hand to hand as money under sanction of law. The decisions of the courts indicate that lawful money includes the classes of money that are declared by the laws of the United States to be legal tender. Since 31 Ü.S.C. § 392 provides that all coins and currencies of the United States, including Federal Reserve notes, regardless of when coined or issued, are legal tender for all debts, a Federal Reserve note is legal tender, which is lawful money.

With reference to your statement that the term "dollar" is an expression of a quantity of silver or gold in coinage, it should be noted that although the dollar as a standard unit of value has been defined through the years in terms of a gold or silver content (see

* * * * * * * *

26

BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr. M,R.

Page 2

31 U.S.C. § 314), there is no requirement that the monetary system of the United States consist of gold or silver coin or currency backed by gold or silver. In this connection. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution grants to the United States the power to coin money and regulate its value. Laws enacted by Congress pursuant to this grant of authority, including section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act discussed above, making paper currency legal tender or lawful money have been upheld by the United States Supreme Court (see the Legal Tender Cases, 110 U.S. 421 (1884)).

Griffeth L. Garwood, Deputy Secretary of the Board

* * * * * * * *

27

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

December 9. 1977

President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. President:

A Federal Reserve "Note" is labeled 'Note (1) and bears a monetary denomination as one 'Dollar', (2) it is accepted as being 'Money', (3) a unit of United States 'Currency', (4) and functions as a 'Bearer Certificate,' (5) for the public's goods and services.

(1) It cannot be a 'Note' since it does not stipulate payment of anything, to anyone, by anyone, at any time!

(2) It is not a 'Dollar'; 'Dollar' is an expression of quantity of silver or gold in coinage, ". . . which shall by law be current as money within the united States. . . ."

(3) It is not 'Money'; 'Money' is an abstract term for a medium of exchange; the paper token cannot be the thing it represents by proxy!

(4) It is not 'Currency'; only a medium of exchange itself can be 'Currency'; the paper token cannot be the thing it represents by proxy!

(5) It is not a 'Bearer Certificate' since it is not a "claim check" on anything on deposit!

Being non-redeemable but accepted as a claim on the public's goods and services it represents a 100% confiscation of the public's wealth without compensation. Can you offer an explanation that will justify this unconstitutional procedure?

A concerned citizen,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

28

THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON

December 22, 1977

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

Thank you for your recent message to President Carter and for taking the time to share your thoughts with him.

Your views are most welcome and appreciated.

With the President's best wishes,

Sincerely,

Landon Kite, Staff Assistant

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

* * * * * * * *

29

AMVAC, INC.
11591 Joslyn Court, Saint Louis, Missouri 63138
314-741-8558

December 28, 1977

Congressman Harold L. Volkmer
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515

Dear Congressman:

It recently became confirmed, to the local public, that Government can TAX the people 100% (K.S.D. Radio St. Louis. Mo. Sun. Eve. Dec. 11, 1977). I had written to the President, just previous to that broadcast, asking, in good faith, if he would give me some explanation that would justify what I believed was an unconstitutional procedure involving a hidden method of 100% confiscation of the public's wealth.

Copies of the letter I sent and the "answer" I received are enclosed for your convenience.

I am writing on behalf of hundreds of my friends and acquaintances, many of whom are vitally interested in an ANSWER to our question from the nation's highest executive officer. Can you tell us how to contact the President or could you possibly ask the President to answer?

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

30

HAROLD L. VOLKMER DISTRICT OFFICES:
9TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
FEDERAL BUILDING

MISSOURI ROOM 316

1228 LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-2956

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

VALERIE DAVIS
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515

District Offices:

Room 316
Federal Building
HANNIBAL, MISSOURI 63401
(314) 221-1200

535 ST. FRANCOIS
FLORISSANT, MISSOURI 63031
(314) 837-1688

200 N. 2ND STREET
ST. CHARLES, MISSOURI 63301
(314) 723-1665

January 6, 1978

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.
11591 Joslyn Court
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

This is to acknowledge your recent letter regarding your correspondence with the White House.

I have taken the liberty of forwarding your letter, along with my request for a comment, to the U.S. Treasury Department. I am sure they will respond as soon as possible.

Again, thank you for contacting me, and if I may be of any further service in the future, please do not hesitate to write again.

With best wishes, I remain

Sincerely yours,

Harold L. Volkmer

HLV:sc

* * * * * * * *

31

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20220

Office of Assistant Secretary of International Affairs

Sale of Gold from Government Stocks and the Value of the Dollar

The initiation of sales of U.S. gold from government stocks to the private market has produced a variety of comments concerning the potential impact on the value of the dollar. Some are concerned that sales will reduce the gold "backing" for the dollar and thereby undermine public willingness to accept dollars. Others believe that only a gold-based monetary system can provide the "discipline" needed to prevent government from pursuing highly inflationary economic policies. Some have felt that sales of gold deprive the nation of financial assets and constitute a loss to the taxpayers. In view of these expressions of public interest, this memorandum has been prepared to provide background on this subject and to respond to these concerns.

Gold's Declining Monetary Role

The monetary role of gold, both domestically and internationally, has been progressively reduced over a period of many years. This trend reflects the general recognition that the limited supply of gold available for monetary purposes is unrelated to the needs of the domestic or world economy. Furthermore, the disparities that inevitably emerge between the official price and prices that reflect private market forces cause speculation which leads to pressures for changes in the official price that have an unavoidably capricious and destabilizing impact.

These severe drawbacks in using gold as the base for a domestic monetary system have long been recognized. Today no country is on a domestic gold standard and only a few countries still retain some fractional gold reserve backing for their currencies. The United States abandoned the domestic gold standard by official action taken over 40 years ago, in 1933-34. Pursuant to authority provided in the Emergency Banking Act of 1933 gold held by private persons in the United States was required to be surrendered to the Government. The Gold Clause Joint Resolution of 1933

* * * * * * * *

32

- 2 -

rendered obligations payable in gold unenforceable in the United States. The Gold Reserve Act of 1934 prohibited private ownership of gold and provided for the termination of gold coinage and for the withdrawal from circulation and melting down of existing gold coins. Redemption of any currency of the United States in gold was, and remains, prohibited.

These actions effectively removed the domestic monetary system's direct link with gold. However, the provisions in the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 for a 35 percent gold certificate reserve against required deposits by banks with the Federal Reserve, and a 40 percent reserve against Federal Reserve notes in circulation remained in force. In 1945 both reserve requirements were reduced to 25 percent., and in 1968 they were finally eliminated in order to make available additional amounts of gold for international monetary purposes and to permit expansion of the money supply to meet the needs of the domestic economy.

The U.S. decision in August 1971 to suspend the convertibility into gold of dollars held by foreign monetary authorities effectively ended use by the U.S. of gold as an international means of settlement. Since that time, therefore, the U.S. gold stock has not been a relevant factor in the international value of the dollar. A reduction in the international monetary role of gold was an important objective of the monetary reform negotiations conducted during 1972-74, and, at the 1975 annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), agreement was reached on a series of concrete measures toward that end. It was agreed to remove those provisions in the imp's Articles of Agreement which give gold a special status different from other commodities by, inter alia:

-- abolishing the official price of gold;

-- eliminating all obligations for use of gold in transactions between the IMF and its members, (and the imp's authority to accept gold unless agreed by an 85 percent majority); and

-- selling l/6th of the imp's gold (25 million ounces) for the benefit of developing countries and distributing 1/6 of the imp's gold to members.

The major industrial countries have further agreed to take no action to peg the price of gold and that the total stock of gold now held by their monetary authorities and the IMF will not be increased.

* * * * * * * *

33

- 3 -

Gold and the Dollar's Value

The value of the dollar is determined neither by U.S. gold holdings nor by the role of gold as a domestic or international reserve. During the period in which the U.S. has been off the domestic gold standard, the American economy has grown to be the strongest in the world and the dollar became the principal international currency. Moreover, the United States has on the whole a better record on inflation than most other countries whether or not their currencies have any gold "backing."

Domestically, the value of the dollar is measured in terms of the quantity of goods and services it will buy, which varies according to our ability to contain inflation. Our rates of inflation are in turn the product of a wide variety of factors, ranging from the fiscal and monetary policies which government follows, to the vagaries of weather which determine whether our crops will be adequate to meet demand. If, for whatever reason, too many dollars end up chasing too few goods, inflation will ensue.

Similarly, the value of the dollar internationally is a function of the competitiveness of the U.S. economy as compared with other economies. Our competitive position depends upon our success in coping with inflation and holding down costs of production of internationally traded goods, relative to our competitors, as well as certain other, usually temporary, factors such as relative growth rates and levels of economic activity. If U.S. goods and services are competitive and the U.S. economy is a relatively attractive place in which to invest, the dollar will tend to be strong internationally. If the reverse is true, the dollar will tend to be weak. Use of our gold reserves to finance intervention in exchange markets might delay the reflection of these underlying trends on exchange rates for the dollar, but could not change them over a period of time.

Gold and Discipline in the Monetary System

To those who see a need for greater discipline in economic policies, it must be conceded that inappropriate government policies have certainly contributed to the present inflationary pressures. But it is unrealistic to expect governments to abdicate their responsibilities for policies affecting levels of employment and economic activity by adopting a system that requires economic policy to be dictated mechanically by changes in official gold stocks. As observed earlier, the amount of gold available for monetary purposes has historically been

* * * * * * * *

34

- 4 -

subject to wide fluctuations unrelated to the needs of the economic system. To base economic policies on such flows would therefore lead to erratic fluctuations in employment, output and prices that would be economically and politically intolerable. Clearly, a preferable means of attaining sustainable non-inflationary growth would be for the public to insist on responsible economic policies from the government.

U.S. Gold Sales

In view of the reduced monetary role of gold, the restrictions on gold ownership by Americans are no longer considered necessary and were therefore removed on December 31, 1974. to help meet market demand for gold, the Government decided to make sales in the private market from time to time. Its stocks are far in excess of current and prospective non-monetary requirements, such as national defense. Such sales benefit the American economy and are in the national interest. U.S. consumption of gold for industrial, artistic and investment purposes far exceeds domestic production. Thus, such sales reduce the need for imports of gold from abroad. It should also be noted that the proceeds of such sales exceeding the official price of $42.22 per fine ounce increase government fiscal receipts and reduce the need for taxes or new Treasury borrowing.

The amount sold to date is a small fraction of total U.S. holdings. Sales are conducted in a manner designed to obtain the best available market price without disrupting the market or placing the Treasury in a position of determining the market price.

* * * * * * * *

35

"MONEY" is a psychological entity, accepted during an exchange, in LIEU of a product or service:

What is Money? Does The U.S. 'Make' It?

(St. Louis Post, Tues., Dec. 27, 1977, p. 3E)
By United Press International

Although Americans write checks and use credit cards for many "money" transactions, the banking process by which money is "created' remains shrouded in professional mystique that is incomprehensible to many. Does toe government "print" money? What determines the "money supply?" Are checks money? The Federal Reserve Bank of New York answers these and other questions about money.

Does the government reduce money's value by printing too much currency?

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing in Washington, D.C., a unit of the Treasury, prints the nation's currency, but it does so on orders from the 12 Federal Rescue Banks. The Fed, the U.S. Central Bank, bases its "orders to print" mainly on estimates of commercial bank and public cash demands.

Then, in effect, doesn't the Fed control the amount of currency in circulation?

The Fed doesn't control the amount of "currency" ["MONEY" is NOT the "CURRENCY" -ed.] in circulation. What it does do is control the amount of "money" ["MONEY" is an intangible; is hasn't any value at all! -ed.] in circulation. Since most U.S. money is checkbook money, the printing presses have little to do with the buying power of money. The Fed maintains money's value through control over commercial banks that create checkbook balances.

The Fed controls [The FED. CANNOT control the volume of "MONEY"! -ed.] the money supply in several ways: It requires member commercial banks to keep reserves in their vaults or balances at their district Reserve Bank. By raising or lowering the percentage of reserves that must be held it increases or reduces the lending ability of member banks. Through changes in the interest rate it charges member banks for short-term loans the Fed makes them more or less attractive to member banks.

The Fed also buys and sells government securities, called "open market operations." When the Fed wants to increase the money supply, it buys securities -- paying with checkbook money, [The FED. "buys" with 'credit' ("money") IT creates!! -ed.] that goes into circulation. When it wants to tighten the money supply, it sells securities -- taking money out of circulation.

Is checkbook money "created" by currency deposits?

Commercial banks create checkbook money whenever they grant a loan, simply by adding new deposit dollars to accounts on their books to exchange for the borrowers [Borrower's debt is "MONETIZED"! -ed.] IOU. Loans are either "secured," backed by valuable items the borrower owns, or "unsecured," backed by the individual's or company's earnings record or credit worthiness [Both totally intangible -ed.].

Banks create money by "monetizing" ["MONETIZING" debt is impossible - debt and "money" are opposites! -ed.] these debts -- that is they create amounts of money against the value of these lOUs. However, banks must have excess reserves [WHAT EXCESS RESERVES? -ed.] to back these loans. To keep the amount of reserves required, either by the Federal Reserve of member banks or by state regulatory agendas, banks will usually borrow from other banks. Member banks can borrow from the Fed.

Are Checks Money?

Checks aren't money in themselves. They are simply order forms instructing banks to move checkbook deposits, which are money, from one account to another ["MONEY" never leaves the confines of the banking system - only the tokens that represent it. -ed.]. Banks don't keep cash in checking accounts and don't transfer currency or coin when acting on a check's instructions. Checkbook deposits are transferred between accounts and banks as bookkeeping entries ["MONEY" only "EXISTS" as records in books!! -ed.] only. In 1977, the nation's 14,600 commercial banks held about 230 billion dollars of checkbook deposits for individuals, businesses and governments.

Are Credit Cards Money?

Credit cards are not a form of money -- but a form of loans [If it "PURCHASES," is it not purchasing power or "MONEY"?? -ed.] in which the user obtains goods and services by promising to pay the credit card company. Since many cardholders have a "credit line," a maximum amount the issuer will lend them, some economists believe lines of credit given on credit cards should be part of the nation's "money supply" which is a measure of the amount of money the public has available for immediate spending [If you do not intend to immediately spend it - is isn't "MONEY" ?? -ed.]. They argue that many spending decisions are based not just on the amount of cash and checkbook money people have, but by the availability of credit [Three different words - but only one item "MONEY" (PURCHASING POWER) -ed.].

"DOLLAR" is a quantity of silver or gold coin ". . . which shall by law be current AS "money" within the United States. . . ."

Analysis by: MONETARY REALIST

* * * * * * * *

36

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

WHAT IS A DOLLAR OF MONEY?

A Quart is a measure of liquid volume Milk, Water, Oil, etc.

A Peck is a measure of produce volume Potatoes, Onions, Apples, etc.

A Pound is a measure of solid weight Butter, Bacon, Beans, etc.

A Dozen is a measure of numerical quantity Eggs, Lemons, Tomatoes, etc.

A Dollar is a measure of money ? ? ? ?

What is the money of account of the United States?

Can there be a Quart of quarts ?

Can there be a Peck of pecks ?

Can there be a Pound of pounds ?

Can there be a Dozen of dozens ?

Can there be a Dollar of dollars ?

What is the money that is measured in dollars ?

If Quart is a measure it cannot measure itself!

If Peck is a measure it cannot measure itself!

If Pound is a measure it cannot measure itself!

If Dozen is a measure it cannot measure itself!

If Dollar is a measure it cannot measure itself!

There cannot be dollar quantities of dollars!

Dollar is an expression of measurement and cannot be measured in terms of itself!

The term 'Dollar' is as well accepted as the term 'Mermaid;' but neither can exist in actuality:

* * * * * * * *

37

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Can you describe a Quart of quarts ?

Can you describe a Peck of pecks ?

Can you describe a Pound of pounds ?

Can you describe a Dozen of dozens ?

Can you describe a Dollar of dollars ?

A Quart measuring Milk cannot be the Milk!

A Peck measuring Apples cannot be the Apples!

A Pound measuring Butter cannot be the Butter!

A Dozen measuring Eggs cannot be the Eggs!

A Dollar measuring Money cannot be the Money!

What is the money of account that is measured in dollar quantities?

". . . The money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars. . . ." -- Sec. 20, Coinage Act of 1792.

". . . The money . . . shall be expressed in dollars. . . ."

The money is not dollars -- dollars are not the money!

Dollar as the unit measurement of -money- cannot be the money! What is the money? Printing the word DOLLAR on pieces of paper does not allow that paper to become money!

"Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars !" -- Treasury, Federal Reserve, and the I.R.S.

* * * * * * * *

38

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Sec. 11

". . . Go1d to silver in an coins which shall by law be current as money within the United States,"

Sec. 16

". . . all the gold and silver coins which shall . . . be a lawful tender in an payments whatsoever."

Sec. 20

". . . the money . . . shall be expressed in dollars. . . ."

Dollars are the units of account of United States lawful money when by law gold and silver coins are current as money within the United States.

Taking the words "will pay to the bearer on demand . . . gold and/or silver coin" off the paper DID NOT ALLOW the paper to remain as a new form of lawful money! What is the new, lawful, money of account, of the United States?

The mere marking of the word 'DOLLAR' on pieces of paper DOES NOT make that paper lawful money of account of the United States!

Sec. 20

". . . the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars . . . all accounts in the public offices and an proceedings in the courts of the united States shall be kept and had in conformity to this regulation."

In the absence of gold and/or silver coin there can not be a dollar unit of the money of account of the United States UNLESS something has REPLACED the gold and/or silver coin as the lawful money of account of the United States: What, is by law current as money within the United States that is measured in dollar units in all accounts in the public offices and all proceedings in the courts of the United States in conformity with regulation Sec. 20, of the Coinage Act of April 2, 1792?

* * * * * * * *

39

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

The copper-nickel coinage cannot by law be current as money within the United States for It would then be debased coinage within the meaning of Sec. 19, of the Coinage Act of 1792.

". . . if any of the gold or silver coins . . . shall be debased . . . every such officer or person who shall commit any or either of said offenses, shall be deemed guilty of felony, and shall suffer death."

The mere stamping of the word DOLLAR or its fractions on copper-nickel tokens DOES NOT make them lawful money of account of the United States. What, is by law current as money within the United States?

"Money" is not a thing in and of itself. Something with distinctness of being must be called "money." Dollar as a unit measurement of "money" must be applied to something that by law is current AS money within the United States. This something then is the "money" of account of the United States and is expressed in DOLLARS. The word 'DOLLAR' cannot be the money of account expressed in terms of itself!

For any court proceeding to go forward it is mandatory that a money of account of the United States be established by law so that the expression 'DOLLAR', as a unit of IT, may be determined.

The word 'DOLLAR' cannot be a unit of value. Value is divided into "value in use" which is subjective, and "value in exchange" which involves worth.

* * * * * * * *

40

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

It is mandatory for there to be a dollar unit of something of worth for there to be a "value in exchange," the expression 'DOLLAR' in and of itself DOES NOT have "value in exchange!"

"Value in use" being SUBJECTIVE does not allow the expression 'DOLLAR' to be a standard of value!

* * * * * * * *

41

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

To whom it may concern:

I have recently become aware of my complicity in a gigantic confidence game. I am extremely fearful of doing anything that may jeopardize my relationship with Law and Order. I wish to honor all commitments to the fullest extent of the Law and justice.

I have just recently learned that ". . . non redeemable notes are not payments of debts. . . ."

Don E. Williams Co., v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service, 51Ed.2d 48 and case number 75-1312

this has serious implications. Officials of the Federal Reserve Bank do not know and cannot explain what a 'dollar' ($) is today. It seems that the public only THINKS there are things called 'dollars' but that in reality ". . . Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars . . . ."

Russell L. Munk, Treasury Department, Washington.

If the Federal Reserve Officials cannot explain what a 'dollar' is how can anyone in good conscience, make out forms under penalty for falsification, and state that 'dollars' of wages were paid.

Please send me, as soon as possible, proper authorization, duly signed and notarized, that for purposes of reporting income and wages, Federal Reserve Notes and Copper-Nickel token coinage is considered Lawful Dollars by your office. This authorization should specify dates to cover the term of the reports you desire. It should also specify that if "payments" are accepted by your office in "monetized debt" units by check, paper tokens (Fed. Notes) or copper-nickel token coinage that there shall be no recourse on me by any branch of your agency for collection in Lawful Dollars at any future time.

It is vital that I have this authorization, in hand, before I proceed with "filling-out" the forms you furnish in their present form.

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

42

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

March 15. 1978

Jerome Kurtz
Commissioner of I.R.S.
1111 Constitution Ave.
Washington, D.C. 20224

Dear Commissioner:

It is true, that a Federal Reserve "Note" is labeled a 'note', bears a monetary denomination in "dollars", is accepted as being "money", a unit of United States Currency and functions as a "bearer certificate" for the non-bank public's goods and services.

It is also true, that actually it is not a note because it does not stipulate payment of anything to anyone, by anyone, at any time. It is not a dollar because DOLLAR is an expression of quantity of silver or gold in coinage ". . . which shall by law be current as money within the United States. . . ." (coinage Act of 1792 never rescinded). It is not "money" because money is an abstract term for a medium of exchange and the paper token (Federal Reserve "Note") cannot be the thing it represents, by proxy. It is not currency because only the medium of exchange ("money") itself can be currency and the paper token cannot be the thing it represents, by proxy. It is not a bearer certificate because it is not a deposit receipt for anything.

Being non-redeemable, but accepted as a claim on the non-bank public's goods and services, it represents almost 100% confiscation, of the public's income from labor, without compensation.

In this manner, the Federal Reserve System (issuers of the Federal Reserve "Notes") are exacting almost 100% "taxation" by circumventing the function of the Internal Revenue Service.

There is preeminent documentation concerning the above procedure, but it does not answer several questions involving its relationship to what the I.R.S. refers to as INCOME TAX. An expeditious answer to these questions is vital since the I.R.S. 'tax time' is fast approaching. Please furnish us, as soon as possible, the correct answers to the following questions.

1. THE PRESENT MONEY OF ACCOUNT OF THE UNITED STATES BEING

* "MONETIZED DEBT"; HOW CAN ANYONE DETERMINE A TAX LIABILITY BASED UPON AN "INCOME" OF DEBT?

* St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank Review, August 1974.

* * * * * * * *

43

2. THERE NO-LONGER BEING ANY "DOLLARS", HOW CAN ANYONE FILE A 1040 FORM STATING THEIR "INCOME" IN "DOLLARS", AND SIGN IT UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY?

". . . Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars.. "

Russell L. Munk, Assistant General Counsel
Department of Treasury. February 18, 1977.

3. SINCE THE TREASURY HAS ACKNOWLEDGED "FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTES" ARE NOT DOLLARS", WILL AND/OR CAN THE I.R.S. GRANT IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION FOR PERJURY TO ANYONE LISTING FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTE" "INCOME" AS DOLLAR INCOME ON A 1040 FORM?

4. THE NON-REDEEMABLE FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTE" IS A PAPER TOKEN REPRESENTING A DOLLAR OF IMAGINARY "MONEY OF ACCOUNT"; JUST EXACTLY HOW ARE INDIVIDUALS TO FORCE THEMSELVES INTO BELIEVING IT IS TANGIBLE INCOME?

5. IF YOUR ANSWER TO THIS LETTER ADVOCATES THE ACCEPTANCE OF FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTES" AS INCOME., JUST EXACTLY HOW MANY FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTES", OF WHAT DENOMINATION, EQUALS ONE LAWFUL DOLLAR OF TAXABLE INCOME?

Please endeavor to answer our questions in clear, understandable, detailed terms. Many of us have filed 1040 forms since 1968 where we listed Federal Reserve "Notes" received as dollar income and are fearful of retroactive prosecution for perjury. Perhaps we can be excused for that, since we acted out of ignorance, plus there wasn't any evil intent.

Please be advised that this letter is an honest attempt to obtain official recognition that some very serious questions exist. No one is above the law. Ignorance of the law excuses no one. We are constitutionally concerned and wish to be officially advised.

Please advise whether we should make-believe we received "dollars" and FILE, becoming vulnerable as SELF-CONFESSED PERJURERS, or WAIT until you furnish us some other alternative and/or waivers of prosecution.

Sincerely yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to U.P.I, and various other representatives of We the People!

* * * * * * * *

44

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

45

Internal Revenue Service
Washington, D.C. 20224

Date: MAR 31, 1978

Department of The Treasury
Person to Contact:
Deborah Brown
Contact Telephone Number:
(202) 566-4936

Your letter dated: 3-15-78
In re: Regarding listing of Federal "Note" Income as Dollar Income

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, MO 63105

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

Thank you for your letter.

It is receiving our attention, and we will send you a reply as soon as possible.

Sincerely yours,

Robert Baumeister, Chief Taxpayer Communications Branch

FORM 2584 (REV. 3-75)

* * * * * * * *

46

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.
11591 Joslyn Ct.
St. Louis, Missouri 63138

Social Security Administration
P.O. Box 57
Baltimore, Maryland 21203

Dear sirs:

My social security number is 055-03-7501. What is the total amount accumulated to that number, including interest, to date.

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

* * * * * * * *

47

Social Security Summary Statement of Earnings
From: Bureau of Data Processing
Baltimore, Maryland 21235

We are pleased to furnish you information about your social security earnings. Shown below are the earnings (not social security contributions) now recorded for you.

Our records may not show all the earnings a person had in the last calendar year because of the time required to receive and process reports. Also. an employer is not required to report earnings above the maximum taxable for the year involved. Therefore, the earnings shown below may not agree with the total earnings on forms W-2. Military earnings for years after 1956 are shown; prior years are not included.

If this statement does not agree with your own record, please contact any social security office. Most questions can be handled by telephone or mail. Enclose the statement if you write or take it with you if you visit one of our offices. Unless you report an error within 3 years, 3 months and 15 days after the year in which you were paid wages or after the taxable year in which you derived self-employment income, correction of our records may not be possible.

The enclosed booklet contains a brief summary of the social security program, information about your social security earnings record, and a further explanation of the action you should take if you do not agree with this statement. Answers to any specific question you have asked will be found on the pages checked in the booklet index. The people in any social security office will answer other questions you may have about the social security program.

Social Security Number055-03-7501
Period Earnings (Not Social Security Contributions)
1937 THRU 1950 19,216.22
1951 THRU 1973 133,616.85
1974 13,200.00
1975 7,502.91
1976 1,576.46
1977 THRU JUN 22.50
TOTAL: 1937 THRU JUN 1977$ 175,134.94
OUR RECORDS SHOW YOU NOW HAVE AT LEAST 40 OUARTERS OF COVERAGE.

Enclosure

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Social Security Administration
Form OAR-7014a (11.76)

* * * * * * * *

48

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

March 21. 1978

Richard C. Voskuil
District Director of I.R.S.
1124 Market Street
St. Louie, Missouri 63101

Dear Sir:

I have recently become aware of the true nature of my complicity in the Social Security Scheme. I am conscientiously opposed to any form of PUBLIC insurance and any situation where an agency can attempt to coerce anyone into waiving their Fifth Amendment guarantee.

For any agency to determine what Religions are RECOGNIZED, and which Religions are not, is a direct violation of the Constitutional restrictions placed upon Government by We the People.

This is a respectfully submitted request upon your office, by this letter, for a full Social "Security" refund of the full amount collected from me and my employers, plus interest to date. My Account Number is 055-03-7501.

It is necessary for me to make this request by this letter because the I.R.S. does not provide a form suitable, to me, for the purpose. I prefer that there no longer be any additional invasions of my privacy, and that I be permanently excluded from any further collections.

* * * * * * * *

49

I respectfully request that the necessary approvals and expediting techniques, at your disposal, be exercised to assure that my requests be granted and that the funds be disbursed at the earliest convenience of the Government.

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to U.P.I. - Various other representatives of We the People.

* * * * * * * *

50

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

51

HAROLD L. VOLKMER DISTRICT OFFICES:
9TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
FEDERAL BUILDING

MISSOURI ROOM 316

1228 LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-2956

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

VALERIE DAVIS
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515

District Offices:

Room 316
Federal Building
HANNIBAL, MISSOURI 63401
(314) 221-1200

535 ST. FRANCOIS
FLORISSANT, MISSOURI 63031
(314) 837-1688

200 N. 2ND STREET
ST. CHARLES, MISSOURI 63301
(314) 723-1665

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M. R.

29 N. Meramec, Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

Thank you for your recent letter. I am glad to have the benefit of your views on the Social Security system.

I regret that I am unable to assist you in your demand for a refund of money you have paid into Social Security, as failure to make such payments constitutes a violation of criminal provisions of the Internal Revenue Service code. You may want to contact an attorney to determine if there are any avenues open to you in this regard.

Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely yours,

Harold -L. Volkmer

HLV:pcl

* * * * * * * *

52

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

June 5, 1978

Ref.: My correspondence of March 15, 1978
Ref.: Your correspondence of March 31, 1978

Jerome Kurtz
Commissioner of I.R.S.
1111 Constitution Ave.
Washington, D.C. 20224

Dear Commissioner:

Some sixty days have elapsed since my original correspondence. My anxiety grows by the minutes. My home life has suffered to no little degree. What is your answer?

I have made the proper, constitutional, request for refund of all "income tax" "paid" and "collected" from me since June, 1968, from the local District Director of I.R.S., to establish inadvertent error on my part in filing "income tax" forms since June, 1968.

I realize, from the statements of prominent past officials of the Treasury and Federal Reserve System, that these very special conditions exist through unconscious acts on the part of government and the Fed. Unconscious though they may be they have and are effecting me and my family. I would like this matter cleared up as soon as possible.

Should I accept your silence as an indication that this situation is unsolvable and is best left "shelved", or should I feel that delay indicates thoroughness and a dedication to resolving this question equitably?

I am fully aware of the gravity of this situation and that it deserves thoroughness in research, but I would sincerely appreciate an "update" on your progress.

Sincerely yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to personal friends and interested officials.

* * * * * * * *

53

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

54

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

April 21. 1978

Richard C. Voskuil
District Director of internal Revenue Service
1124 Market Street

St. Louis. Missouri 63101

Dear Sir:

I respectfully request that you accept this correspondence as my formal request for refund of overpayment of "Income tax". I also ask that you accept my statement that I did not make the overpayments with any evil Intent. If I have violated any laws it was by complying with Internal Revenue Service directives that were, in themselves, violations of reason. I am attempting to correct my error at the first Instance of true recognition. I realize that eventually I may have to present my evidence to the Supreme Court or perhaps to Congress, but I do wish to clear this matter up, if possible, without being burdened with such an arduous task.

Amendment XVI (Ratified February 3, 1913)

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on Incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

The Coinage Act of 1965 and its provisions ushered in a condition whereby the MONEY OF ACCOUNT of the United States became "MONETIZED DEBT".

* * * * * * * *

55

-2-

St. Louis Federal Reserve Review, August 1974

A non-redeemable note, however, is not payment of a debt!

Don O, Williams Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 51 Ed 2d 48 end case number 75-1312

I exchange Federal Reserve "Notes" for the things I need; no payment is offered by me. I accept Federal Reserve "Notes" for the things I offer in exchange with others; no payment is received by me. No payment is offered or received in exchanges of goods and/or services.

The present system of "MONETIZED DEBT" represented by pseudo Federal Reserve "Notes" has eliminated all means of DEBT SETTLEMENT and rendered all attempts to pay with Federal Reserve "Notes" a farce. It is impossible to incur or determine any income in the absence of any payment. INCOME is impossible to DERIVE in a system employing PERPETUAL DEBT!

Senior Vice President -- Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louie, K.S.D. Radio, December 11, 1977

The maximum reimbursement obtainable today, exercising to the fullest the Copper-Nickel Coinage, is 3%. Exchanging full-value goods and/or services for a maximum of 3% return forfeits all possible derivation of INCOME. The 97% minimum loss on each exchange cannot be compensated for by increasing the volume or velocity of exchanges.

* * * * * * * *

56

-3-

DERIVATION of INCOME, from the AMOUNT OF LOSS SUFFERED, is an IMPOSSIBLE concept. Determining a tax liability, on the basis of the VOLUME or VELOCITY of LOSSES SUFFERED, is NOT A REQUIRED DUTY.

IN THE ABSENCE OF INCOME, THERE CANNOT BE AN INCOME TAX:

I hereby respectfully request that all amounts of "income tax", withheld or accepted from me, since the introduction of "MONETIZED DEBT" be refunded. For your convenience, I have listed the amounts as determined from my recollection, to the best of my knowledge.

1968223.59F.R.N.s(Federal Reserve "Notes".)
1969210.00"
19701,999.57"
19712,118.34"
19722,454.28"
1973598.00"
19744,229.68"
TOTAL:11,833.46"

It will be sufficient for Internal Revenue Service to determine what interest shall apply. It was my error, but it has taken some time to prepare the proper grounds to request this refund. I do not wish penalties from the Internal Revenue Service for the elapsed time, but I would appreciate a reasonable settlement.

* * * * * * * *

57

-4-

As District Director of Internal Revenue Service, with power to Initiate Intelligence Division Investigation of any United States Citizen, you can appreciate the fear that has all but overwhelmed me. I am caught between some very powerful forces. Internal Revenue Service force to compel me to file a fraudulent "Income tax" form listing "MONETIZED DEBT" as INCOME. On the other side is the force of LAW that can prosecute me for listing the "MONETIZED DEBT" as INCOME when in fact it cannot be.

By this correspondence I am taking the option of obeying the LAW as, to the best of my ability, I perceive it to be. To be as objectively reasonable as possible I must tell you that I do not believe that the Internal Revenue Service or any other branch or agency of Government is above the LAW.

A non-redeemable note is not payment of a debt. Using a non-redeemable note to induce another to part with some valuable thing belonging to him, or to surrender a legal right is FRAUD. OFFERING Federal Reserve "Notes", with full knowledge that they are not NOTES by definition and are non-redeemable, is an intentional perversion of truth.

Official designation of Federal Reserve "Notes" as legal tender does not excuse the actual FRAUD committed by using them. Committing FRAUD is unlawful. Listing loot, obtained through FRAUD, as income would be waiving a constitutional guarantee against bearing witness against one's self. I am fearful of being retroactively prosecuted for having committed overpayment errors and must insist that I either receive the refund or be advised on what precise grounds it is being denied.

* * * * * * * *

58

-5-

Please act upon this correspondence. The Internal Revenue Service does not provide a form, suitable to me, for the purpose of requesting this refund.

I respectfully request that the necessary disbursement be made at the earliest convenience of the Internal Revenue Service.

I thank you in advance, for your efforts in expediting my claim.

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R

Copies to various personal friends and interested officials.

* * * * * * * *

59

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

60

ADDRESS ANY REPLY TO:
Department of The Treasury
P. O. Box 1546, Central Station
St. Louis, Missouri 63188

District Director
Internal Revenue Service

DATE: MAY 02, 1978
IN RELY REFER TO: DIR:STL:ID-5:GB:ao

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

We are In receipt of your letter dated April 21, 1978, in which you request a refund of all amounts of "income tax" withheld or accepted from you.

We will give all appropriate considerations regarding this matter.

Sincerely yours,

R. C, Voskuil, District Director

* * * * * * * *

61

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

May 5, 1978

Richard C. Voskuil
District Director of internal Revenue Service
1124 Market Street
St. Louis, Missouri. 63101

Additional grounds in support of request for refund: Refer to correspondence of April 21, 1978.

Dear Sir:

I pledge allegiance to a Republic. I swear to uphold its constitution. The Constitution guarantees the inalienable rights of the citizens of the United States by limiting the rights of Government. Government is a servant of the people. The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating It to be valid. One must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and in affective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

"Such an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it. . . .

"A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.

"No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."

Sixteenth AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE
Second Edition, Section 177 (1964)

* * * * * * * *

62

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 2, May 5, 1978

The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of our Republic, Article V set the provisions for amendments to our Constitution. Article X limits those changes to remain within the scope of the original supreme law of the land, reserving those rights, not delegated to the United States, for the people. The sixteenth amendment did not, nor could it, as written, supersede Article I, section 2. as follows:

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by law direct."

The Sixteenth Amendment purported to give Congress a second way to tax the people, without properly removing the first method by repeal, ". . . any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid. One must prevail . . . indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. Article I, Section 2, supersedes the Sixteenth Amendment as written.

It is very disturbing to me that anyone wishing to act lawfully, in the United States today, is labeled "TAX STRIKER" or "TAX RESISTOR". Being an honest, God fearing citizen, sincerely concerned with our nation's purpose and direction, used to be a desirable attribute.

Our predecessors, as far back as our first President, George Washington, have warned their citizens against unfunded "paper money". The misery, chaos, strife and destruction brought about by the Continental "DOLLAR" is about to be unleashed upon our nation again. And those Citizens, who see this happening, and are trying to do something about preventing it, are labeled "TAX STRIKER" and/or "TAX RESISTOR", unjustly, and undeservedly.

I, myself, am very concerned about my own position since June of 1968. I have just learned, through research of Treasury correspondence, direct correspondence, personally, and legal research, that the most unbelievable HOAX on Earth has been perpetrated upon the citizens of the United States and the world.

* * * * * * * *

63

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 3, May 5, 1978

Since taxes are normally paid with "money" it was necessary to start there. What is money? I found that money is an abstract term applied to the generally accepted medium of exchange used by the people. An abstract term that had, at various times, felt the heavy hand of Government. In our Republic, the United States of America, the term money had a prefix, LAWFUL, attached on April 2, 1792 which has never been rescinded. The Constitution Article I, Section 8, paragraph 5. gave Congress the right to COIN money as follows:

"To coin money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Paragraph 6, provided:

"To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

Article I, Section 10, paragraph 1, stated as follows;

"No State shall . . . make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; . ."

The Coinage Act of April 2, 1792 provided for the creation of a government mint and free coinage of bullion into coinage. Excerpts from the Coinage Act of 1792 are as follows:

Sec. 11.

And be it further enacted, That the proportional value of gold to silver in all coins which shall by law be current as money within the United States.

Sec. 16.

And be it further enacted, That all the gold and silver coins which shall have been struck at, and issued from the said mint, shall be a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever.

Sec. 19.

And be it further enacted, That if any of the gold or silver coins which shall be struck or coined at the said mint shall be debased . . . every such officer or person who shall commit any or either of the said offences, shall be deemed guilty of felony, and shall suffer death.

Sec. 20.

And be it further enacted . That the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars. . . ."

* * * * * * * *

64

MERRILL M.E Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

page 4, May 5, 1978

The provisions of this Act are still in force, even though they are being ignored. The significance, of these provisions, if properly understood, is beyond initial comprehension of the average citizen. The people have such faith in Government that they could not begin to suspect Government of allowing them to be robbed, by FRAUD and DECEIT, of everything they labor for. The private citizen, for the most part, still believes the paper notes accepted as "Money" are able to redeem gold and silver coin. Even knowing, by daily reminders, that the Federal Reserve "Notes" are non-redeemable, in specie, the public has not become aware of the significant fact THEY SHOULD STILL BE REDEEMABLE, BY LAW!

The old 1928 series of Federal Reserve "Notes" carried the legend as follows:

REDEEMABLE IN GOLD ON DEMAND AT THE UNITED STATES TREASURY OR IN GOLD OR LAWFUL MONEY AT ANY FEDERAL RESERVE BANK.

The fact that that old legend has been replaced with one that reads as follows: --

THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE

-- does not, lawfully, remove the original promise. The Federal Reserve "Note" was introduced to be interchangeable with the gold and silver certificates. The gold and silver certificates were originally issued as deposit receipts for specie deposited. The current repudiation of redemption is not FRIVOLOUS, it is downright unlawful expropriation of the people's gold and silver specie, without the people's awareness or the formality of DUE PROCESS.

The lawful money of account of the united States is still gold and silver coin. The "Monetary Standard" is gold coin.

The United States' monetary unit of value, sometimes called the "monetary standard" or "unit of account," is the gold dollar. This unit represents 12.632 grains of gold, nine-tenths fine. Put another way, since October 18, 1973 the fine gold content of one dollar is equal to slightly more than one-forty-second of a Troy ounce.

Board of Governors
Federal Reserve System
Washington, D. C.

* * * * * * * *

65

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALICT
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 5, May 5, 1978

A further check with Treasury Officials disclosed as follows:

"This is to respond to your letter of November 23, 1976 in which you request a definition for the dollar as distinguished from a Federal Reserve note.

"Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars."

Russell L. Munk
Assistant General Counsel
Department of The Treasury

A further check with Treasury Officials disclosed as follows:

"As stated in our letter of July 29, this Act has not been rescinded by Congress, therefore, the same monetary system that was established on April 2, 1792 is in effect today.

Bruce A. Budlong
Acting Director, Special Financing Staff
Department of The Treasury
Fiscal Service

August 18, 1977

In summation of the above, the only accurate objective account of what is happening is that the non-bank public, of the United States, is being systematically expropriated of all their wealth and labor. The means by which the fraudulent looting is being accomplished, is the Federal Reserve "Notes".

1. A Federal Reserve "Note" is labeled 'note'.

IT CANNOT BE A NOTE SINCE IT DOES NOT STIPULATE PAYMENT OF ANYTHING, TO ANYONE, BY ANYONE AT ANY TIME!

2. A Federal Reserve "Note" bears a monetary denomination as one dollar.

IT IS NOT A DOLLAR; DOLLAR IS AN EXPRESSION OF QUANTITY OF SILVER OR GOLD IN COINAGE, ". . . WHICH SHALL BY LAW BE CURRENT AS MONEY WITHIN THE UNITED STATES . . . ."

3. A Federal Reserve "Note" is issued as being the "money".

IT IS NOT MONEY; MONEY IS AN ABSTRACT TERM FOR A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE; THE PAPER TOKEN CANNOT BE THE THING IT REPRESENTS BY PROXY.

* * * * * * * *

66

MERRILL ME Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 6, May 5, 1978

4. A Federal Reserve "Note" is issued as being the currency.

IT IS NOT CURRENCY; ONLY A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE ITSELF CAN BE CURRENCY; THE PAPER TOKEN CANNOT BE THE THING IT REPRESENTS BY PROXY;

5. A Federal Reserve "Note" is accepted as being a bearer certificate for the non-bank public's goods and services.

IT IS NOT A BEARER CERTIFICATE SINCE IT IS NOT A DEPOSIT RECEIPT FOR ANYTHING ON DEPOSIT!

BEING NON-REDEEMABLE BUT ACCEPTED AS A CLAIM ON THE NON-BANK PUBLIC'S GOODS AND SERVICES IT REPRESENTS A 100% CONFISCATION OF THE PUBLIC'S WEALTH AND LABOR WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.

NO EXPLANATION COULD JUSTIFY THIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL PROCEDURE!

Darryl R. Francis, former President, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, gave this procedure a name, in a statement before the Committee on Banking and Currency, House of Representatives, July 18, 1974.

"Since the direct method of printing money to finance Government expenditures is prohibited in the U.S., the monetization of Government deficits has occured indirectly. . . . Government debt is ultimately being financed by the creation of new money. . . . I doubt that monetization of debt has been a conscious act on the part of the Government or on the part of the Federal Reserve System. Rather, I believe the reason it has occured lies in the RELATIVE VISIBILITY of the three methods of financing Government expenditures -- taxes, borrowing from the public, and indirect debt monetization. . . . But in the case of debt monetization, the immediate and even the short-run impact is neither an increase in taxes, nor an increase in interest rates. And yet, real resources still are being transferred from private to Government use. . . . I can find no benefits accruing to the whole of society from debt monetization, but the risks are very serious and can be expressed in one word -- Inflation."

* * * * * * * *

67

MERRILL M.E JEN KINS, SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

page 7, May 5, 1978

"Monetization of debt" or as it suggests, monetized debt (debt accepted as being money) is the name of the NEW MODERN Medium of exchange. Oddly enough, the Card Shark, or gambling cheat is called a "MECHANIC" and the debt as money procedure is explained in a Federal Reserve Publication called: MODERN MONEY MECHANICS.

As a victim of the MODERN MONEY MECHANICS, I am being forced to use an imaginary medium of exchange called "monetized debt."

"In addition to securities, the Federal Government issues noninterest-bearing debt-currency or paper money. Currency is so widely accepted as a medium of exchange that most people do not think of It as debt."

Page 6, "Two Faces of Debt"
Revised Oct, 1972
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Publication.

When I say: "I am forced;" I mean exactly that. If I want to eat, I must either beg for food or engage in a felony pursuit of passing counterfeit. Offering Federal Reserve "Notes" to my unsuspecting fellow citizens, while personally knowing they are non-redeemable, is FRAUD. I am forced by their use to obtain loot, of an edible nature, to survive.

If I want clothing, I must either, beg, borrow, or steal it, from those that produce clothing, by unlawful offering of LEGAL TENDER. I personally know that Federal Reserve "Notes" are not the deposit receipts for equivalent value in silver coin that the merchant thinks the paper "currency" is.

"Neither paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities, Intrinsically, a dollar bill is just a piece of paper. Deposits are merely book entries. Coins do have some intrinsic value as metal, but far less than their face amount."

"What, then, makes these instruments -- checks, paper money, and coins -- acceptable at face value in payment of all debts and for other monetary uses? Mainly, it is the confidence people have that they will be able to exchange such money for REAL goods and services whenever they choose to do so."

Page 3 "MODERN MONEY MECHANICS"
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Publication. Revised June, 1975.

* * * * * * * *

68

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 8, May 5, 1978

I am forced to be a part of a GIGANTIC CONFIDENCE GAME. Using non-redeemable paper and metal tokens in expropriating exchanges that do not offer equivalent value for the possessions of others. Redemption is denied by the issuers of the "currency" and coin and I am forced under extreme duress of hunger and other human needs to offer them in exchange; knowing full well they have no intrinsic value.

Because most people accept our debt currency and coin as though it had equivalent value, does not detract from the fact. that it does not have value. Non-redeemable "notes" of a private corporation are not lawful payment of debts.

Don E. Williams Co. vs Commissioner of I.R.S. 51L Ed 2d 48 75-1312

"Demand deposits, which account for the remaining three-fourths of the money stock, are issued by commercial banks."

p.16, February, 1975 Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review.

"Confidence in these forms of money also seems to be tied in some way to the fact that assets exist on the books of the Government and the banks equal to the amount of money outstanding, even though most of these assets themselves are no more than pieces of paper (such as customers' promissory notes), and it is well understood that money is not redeemable in them."

Page 3 "MODERN MONEY MECHANICS"
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Publication.

I am fully aware of the fact that Federal Reserve "Notes", copper-nickel coinage, and all currently used tokens, representing monetized debt are not lawful payment of debts in excess of 25cents. Yet, I must accept those tokens in exchanges for the results of my labor, but I do not have to believe they are equivalent value to that which I SURRENDERED to get those tokens.

In accepting them I am not paid for the result of my labor I gave up. When I pass them on in an act of FRAUD and PASSING COUNTERFEIT, I help to PERPETUATE the EXPROPRIATION of wealth that began with their issuance.

* * * * * * * *

69

MERRILLM.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

page 9, May 5, 1978

If I were counterfeiting Federal Reserve "notes" myself, the loot might be considered income from felonious endeavor and be "taxable" under UNLAWFUL INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE administrative statutes. However, I do not counterfeit the notes myself, but get them in exchange for the results of my human exertion. Eventually I use them to obtain the results of human exertion of others. These exchanges then amount to swapping LIKE-KIND; which might not be "taxable" under UNLAWFUL INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE administrative statutes. Swapping results of human exertion for the results of human exertion of others does not involve incomes, logically, morally, or lawfully:

Income, as that gain or recurrent benefit (usually measured in money) which proceeds from labor, business, or property, is no longer income, because the money of account of the United States is now "monetized debt", by actuality -- while lawfully remaining gold and silver coin.

An exchange involving the act of giving or taking one thing in return for another as an equivalent, is barter. Our former money of account which had commodity parity equivalent to that for which it was exchanged, was barter.

Gold and silver certificates as deposit receipts for specie are not barter itself, but by proxy, represent commodity of equivalent parity in exchanges for goods and services. Any paper certificate, redeemable or non-redeemable, received during exchange is not an equivalent parity in itself. The thing received, subsequently, upon offering the certificate to another, is the equivalent of the thing originally offered to get the certificate.

The involvement of a certificate in any exchange makes the exchange INDIRECT BARTER. The use of certificates introduces a time factor to all exchanges which makes compensation dependent upon the sequential exchange of things for certificates and certificates for things.

Gold and silver certificates were obtained by depositing gold or silver coin, for which the pieces of paper were deposit receipts. The certificates for things and things for certificates integrity went unbroken. The introduction of pseudo "notes" in the image of gold and silver certificates was pure and simple counterfeiting to commit FRAUD.

Introduction of Federal Reserve "Notes" as equivalents to gold and silver certificates was deliberate counterfeiting. No gold was deposited, or the Federal Reserve "Note" would be a gold certificate. No silver was deposited or the Federal Reserve "Note" would be a silver certificate. The Federal Reserve "Note" introduced without an equivalent deposit, is a fraud. Anything obtained by offering a Federal Reserve "Note", is LOOT obtained through FRAUD.

* * * * * * * *

70

MERRILL M E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 10, May 5, 1978

A Federal Reserve "Note" received, is evidence that the holder has been defrauded out of the thing surrendered for it. The holder not only did not receive any compensation, but suffered a loss in the attempt at exchange.

All exchanges, properly reduced to their fundamental basis, are exchanges of the results of labor of one individual for the results of labor of another. The introduction of monetized debt or perpetual debt through the medium of Federal Reserve "Notes", destroyed the integrity of bartering.

Income, as that gain or benefit which proceeds from labor, has been perpetually denied to the non-bank public for the duration of the exclusive use of monetized debt. All that could be called income is taken by the issuer of Federal Reserve "Notes" (pieces of paper) at the time of their issuance.

"But what induces the non-banking public to accept liabilities of private, profit-making institutions such as banks?

Page 3 November 1976, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Review.

"The decrease in purchasing power incurred by holders of money due to inflation imparts gains to the issuers of money. . .''

Page 22, November 1975, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Review.

The process of "monetizing debt" is a direct reversal of the barter system. The pieces of paper are used to "pay", for the PAPER, the INK and the LABOR that went into their production. The issuers of money get everything for nothing. The rate of profit is infinite!

BEFORE, gold and silver certificates (pieces of paper) could only be obtained by depositing gold or silver coin. The pieces of paper were used as proxy representatives of gold and silver coin in subsequent exchanges. Only gold or silver coin could be legal tender by an act of Congress -- never rescinded to date.

The coin had to exist and be deposited before a piece of paper could be issued as a deposit receipt. It was the COIN the piece of paper represented that had the PARITY equivalent. "Offering the paper" was accepted as being offered the coin.

* * * * * * * *

71

MERRILLM.E. JEN KINS, SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 11, May 5, 1978

With the introduction of monetized debt all gold and silver coin deposits were eliminated. Now pieces of paper (Federal Reserve "Notes") are printed and their issuer gets everything for nothing. Anyone, offering anything, receives pieces of paper that are not deposit receipts. The paper comes into being first and upon issuance expropriates goods and/or services. The paper, not being a receipt, represents nothing as an equivalent, nothing as barter, just IMAGINATION.

The piece of paper (Federal Reserve "Note") looks like the silver certificate, is the same size, weighs the same, and carries the same numerals and picture. The non-bank public accepts the counterfeit piece of paper as a physical token acting by proxy for an imagined equivalent of the goods and/or services they are offering. The non-bank public still believes they are being offered a deposit receipt for silver coin.

The issuer of the Federal Reserve "Note" gets everything by the creation and issuance of the pieces of paper instead of the pieces of paper being created and Issued as gold and silver certificate deposit receipts for gold and silver coin offered in deposit.

The non-bank public's minds are forced into accepting an excursion into the realm of non-reason as the basis for the impossible concept, "monetized debt."

IF UPON RECEIPT OF A FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTE", AN INDIVIDUAL IMAGINES HAVING RECEIVED 'PAYMENT', THAT IMAGINED PARITY IS MONEY!

IF UPON RECEIPT OF A FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTE", AN INDIVIDUAL REALIZES NON-PAYMENT, THAT MISSING PARITY IS DEBT.

Income, as that gain or benefit (usually measured in money) which proceeds from labor, would have to be IMAGINED, to exist at all, for the duration of the use of "monetized debt." To call the receipt of a Federal Reserve "Note" 'income' to the one receiving it would involve a stretch of imagination beyond the bounds of reason!

Income tax, as a tax on a person's income is an exercise in futility. The system of monetization of debt has eliminated all manner of income and substituted for it a system of 97% seigniorage. 97% seigniorage is 97% loss of equivalent parity in any exchange involving money which is the usual measurement of income.

THE INABILITY OF THESE NON-REDEEMABLE NOTES TO PERFORM THE FUNCTION OF LAWFUL DEBT PAYMENT RENDERS THEM INCAPABLE OF BEING USED TO INCUR A TAX LIABILITY.

* * * * * * * *

72

MERR1LL M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 12, May 5, 1978

As of June, 1968, all redemption of specie certificates was terminated for the U.S. non-bank public. At that point in time the last vestige of existing justification for a monetary income tax was also terminated. In my correspondence of April 21, 1978, I requested that all monetary income taxes collected from me since 1968 be refunded in dollar denominations of Federal Reserve "Notes".

It is necessary for me to request the return of the funds since a credit against future tax liabilities, which are not likely to occur, is not a satisfactory option. It would please me greatly if our great Republic were to return to lawful procedures for all taxation. However, until that time I shall have to be content with paying, to the best of my ability, wherever and whenever I am billed for same.

It is not practical to pay off debts anymore in the true sense. All anyone can do is pass on the obligation to pay, by transferring possession of Federal Reserve "notes", which in themselves do not convey ownership of anything. Federal Reserve "Notes" only serve as physical evidence that their holder has acquired them by begging, borrowing, stealing or surrendering goods and/or services for the imaginary parity (monetized debt) they represent.

Receiving a Fed. "Note", is not receiving anything for the goods or service offered. An individual mowing a lawn for a Fed. "Note" does not know what he exchanged his labor for! If he "spends" the Fed. "Note", for a Jar of Jam, then, and only then, will he know that he mowed a lawn for a Jar of Jam. If he "spends" the Fed. "Note" for a cigarette Ash tray, then, and only then, will he know that he mowed a lawn for a cigarette Ash tray.

Only after "spending" a Fed. "Note" would any holder know what his compensation is for the human exertion he expended to acquire the Fed. "Note". The use of Fed. "Notes", which in themselves do not convey ownership of anything, negates the ability to negotiate a contract. Anyone attempting to negotiate a contract to deliver a specific thing for another specific thing in return is subject to receiving Fed. "Notes" instead. The Fed. "Notes" do not represent ANY TANGIBLE COMMODITY and the contract is broken by their acceptance.

That a receiver of Fed. "Notes" may pass them on and in so doing expropriate a specific thing from a third party does not eliminate the fact that a simple exchange contract was negated by the use of Fed. "Notes."

Exchange:

1. Act of giving or taking one thing in return for another as an equivalent; trade; specif., Barter.

* * * * * * * *

73

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 13, May 5, 1978

Barter:

To traffic or trade by direct exchange of one commodity for another. To trade or exchange (goods or services). Act or practice of bartering; also, the thing bartered.

Contract:

1. An agreement, esp. one legally enforceable, between two or more persons to do or to forbear something; a bargain; covenant.

Article I, Section 10, paragraph 1 of the United States Constitution reads in part:

"No State shall . . . pass any . . . Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts."

Fed. "Notes" designated as 'Legal Tender' are a violation of the U.S. Constitution in that they bear a legend:

THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.

The acceptance of Fed. "Notes" in lieu of the specific thing called-out in the contract violates the obligation of the contract. The Fed. "Note" not only does not convey ownership of anything, it is not even a note collectable from its issuer. The contracting party holding the Fed. "Notes" has been denied the specific thing contracted for, and must now pass on the abominations (Fed. "Notes) in order to get any compensation at all. The inalienable right of contract guaranteed by the United States Constitution has been denied by the Legal Tender Acts. The honorable system of contracts, exchanges and barter has been replaced by a CONFIDENCE GAME -- FORCED UPON -- the unaware citizens.

I say forced upon the unaware citizens because the nature of this abomination is such that it required subliminal indoctrination to accomplish it. The very concept "monetized debt" involved human mind conditioning over a long period of time. Distortion of language, distortion of reasoning power were accomplished. The very fundamental abilities of humans that raised them above the level of dumb animals was destroyed.

CASE IN POINT: THE WORD 'DOLLAR'!

"The money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars . . . ."

Coinage Act, April 2nd, 1792.

* * * * * * * *

74

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 14, May 5, 1978

Dollar is a QUANTITY of the money of account of the United States. The coinage act of 1792 specified quantities of gold or silver coin to be termed a dollar QUANTITY.

A specified quantity of gold in coin form was called a dollar QUANTITY and became known as a "GOLD DOLLAR".

REVERSING the terminology from a dollar QUANTITY of gold to: a "GOLD DOLLAR" was tantamount to reversing the terminology - a quart of milk to: a "MILK QUART" it completely reversed the roles of measurement and entity. The word dollar became accepted as an entity, (a thing which has reality and distinctness of being, either in fact or for thought).

Since 'DOLLAR' was a word meaning QUANTITY in REALITY, it could only be a 'THING' in THOUGHT. Although there were and are no such things as 'DOLLARS' per se, the term DOLLAR became almost universally accepted as a thing in reality instead of an OBJECT OF THOUGHT. And so it was with silver.

A specified quantity of silver in coin form was called a dollar QUANTITY and became known as a "SILVER DOLLAR".

REVERSING the terminology from a dollar QUANTITY of silver to: a "SILVER DOLLAR" was tantamount to reversing the terminology - a pound of bread to: a "BREAD POUND". It completely reversed the roles of measurement and entity. The word dollar became accepted as an entity, (a thing which has reality and distinctness of being, either in fact or for thought).

Since 'DOLLAR' was a word meaning QUANTITY in REALITY, it could only be a 'THING' in THOUGHT. Although there were and are no such things as 'DOLLARS' per se, the term DOLLAR became almost universally accepted as a thing in reality instead of an OBJECT OF THOUGHT.

Now there were TWO so-called 'DOLLARS', one "consisting" of gold and the other "consisting" of silver. The very concept of there being TWO 'DOLLAR' entities violates the language we use. For 'DOLLAR' to be an entity it must have individuality. For anything to be an entity it must be a thing which has REALITY AND DISTINCTNESS of being, either in fact or for thought. Distinctness means INDIVIDUALITY in definition. Our language doesn't permit there being TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS for the same 'OBJECT' in thought or otherwise.

THE "DOLLAR" THEN TAKES ITS PROPER PLACE AS EXISTING ONLY IN THOUGHT AS A VIOLATION OF REASON, ALONGSIDE UNICORN, MERMAID, AND LEPRECHAUN; THERE NEVER WAS AND THERE IS NOT NOW ANY SUCH THING AS A "DOLLAR"!

* * * * * * * *

75

MERRILL M.E. JENKINS SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 15, May 5, 1978

'DOLLAR' is a word like QUART and POUND used to express a quantity of some commodity. Unlike QUART and POUND which can be used to express quantities of many commodities, the word DOLLAR was limited to only two commodities, gold and silver, and then only gold and/or silver minted into coinage, as currency, as the lawful money of account of the united States.

The paper proxy tokens, (certificates) which represented the coinage it could redeem, were documentation of the role of the word 'DOLLAR'; they bore wording saying they could redeem DOLLAR QUANTITIES of silver coin or DOLLAR QUANTITIES of gold coin. The certificates were labeled 'LEGAL TENDER' (legal to offer) since they represented the gold and silver coin the United States Constitution specified that Government must tender in the payment of its debts. A "One Dollar" certificate could redeem, a one dollar quantity of gold or silver coin. A "Ten Dollar" certificate could redeem ten times as much as a "One Dollar" certificate. Although labeled 'LEGAL TENDER' there wasn't any attempt to have anyone accept the certificates as payment in THEMSELVES!

THE CERTIFICATES REPRESENTING A CLAIM ON GOLD COIN WERE REPUDIATED IN 1933.

THE CERTIFICATES REPRESENTING A CLAIM ON SILVER COIN WERE REPUDIATED IN 1968.

THE REPUDIATION OF GOLD AND SILVER REDEMPTION LEFT THE WORD 'DOLLAR' WITHOUT ANY MEANING AT ALL. It was continued on the basis of residual MEMORY, AND ONLY AS AN ENTITY IN THOUGHT -- VIOLATING ALL REASON!

The certificates that once redeemed gold and silver coin were now accepted almost universally as being "DOLLARS" in themselves along with the pseudo "notes" of the Federal Reserve System.

A "One Dollar" piece of paper is accepted as being 'one dollar' and another piece of paper of the same size, shape, weight and general markings, but bearing the numeral 'TEN' profusely, is accepted as being 'ten dollars'. There is no thought of the fact that the word 'DOLLAR', even as an object of thought, hasn't any INDIVIDUALITY. It is totally psychological now; it is whatever anyone THINKS it is;

HOWEVER VIVIDLY ANYONE PERCEIVES A "DOLLAR" AS BEING AN ENTITY, IT IS STILL A VIOLATION OF REASON, AS HEREIN ABOVE DOCUMENTED.

* * * * * * * *

76

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 16, May 5, 1978

For any agency of Government to stipulate that a 'dollar' is a unit of United States Currency, it is beholding on that agency to stipulate what the currency of the Nation is. If that agency knows the coinage Act of 1792 stipulates that "the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars," and that Act stipulated quantities of gold and silver to be known as 'DOLLAR' QUANTITIES, then it stipulated that gold and silver coins were the money of account of the United States,

For any agency of Government to know that a 'DOLLAR' is a unit quantity of United States Currency, and that gold and silver coin are no longer being minted, they must know what took their place!

WHAT IS NOW THE MONEY OF ACCOUNT OF THE UNITED STATES; AND WHAT WEIGHT AND PURITY OF IT EQUALS A DOLLAR QUANTITY?

Gold certificates are not dollars!

Silver certificates are not dollars!

Federal Reserve "Notes" are not dollars!

Dozens of eggs are not dollars!

Pounds of bread are not dollars!

Until such time as the Coinage Act of 1792 is rescinded and a new money of account of the United States stipulated; until Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1 of the United States Constitution, that specifies "no state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in the payment of (its) debt(s)" is rescinded -- there cannot be any income or income tax.

Good faith attempts, to determine tax liability, are thwarted by the complex seigniorage surrounding the present "coinage" of the United States.

Federal Reserve "Notes" are not 'notes'; they do not stipulate who gets paid, how much, by whom and when.

Federal Reserve "Notes" are not bearer certificates; they do not stipulate being a claim on anything. The only value that can be considered that of the "note" itself is the salvage value of the paper and ink it consists of, or the uses to which it may be put. The Federal Reserve "Note" may be used as wrapping to dispose of chewing gum. it might be folded and used as a wedge to stabilize a wobbly table etc.

* * * * * * * *

77

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 17, May 5, 1978

["If no return was filed, there was no income." Yoder v. Harris and other cases, 650 F2d. 1170; Singer v. Weinberger, 513 F2d. 887. -ed.]

A Federal Reserve "Note", used as a proxy representative of the present United States Coinage during exchanges, may be used to acquire that coinage, but the commodity value of the metal received is in extremely low ratio to the goods and services exchanged for it.

The difference in parity between the actual value and exchange value of a coin is called seigniorage. The Coinage Act of 1965 established 97% seigniorage as being legal for the Secretary of the Treasury to take from the public. All silver coinage was removed and replaced with a copper-nickel substitute. This "coinage" is the token, pseudo, money of account of the United States in full violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Coinage Act of 1792 which has never been rescinded.

The maximum legal reimbursement obtainable today, exercising to the fullest the legal but unlawful coinage is 3%. Exchanging full value goods and services for a maximum of 3% return forfeits all possible ideas of profit. The 97% minimum loss on each exchange cannot be eliminated by increasing the number or velocity of exchanges.

AN INCOME TAX BASED UPON THE AMOUNT OF LOSS SUFFERED IS A TOTALLY RIDICULOUS CONCEPT AND IMPOSSIBLE TO COMPREHEND.

WITHOUT INCOME THERE CANNOT BE AN INCOME TAX!!

A confidence game with the magnitude this correspondence is disclosing, is without doubt the greatest HOAX ever perpetrated on Earth and must bring many questions to mind. With maximum desire to answer as many of these that I can anticipate I will digress from the main arguments of this correspondence to answer some of them now.

1. Would it be equitable to the rest of the population to give me the refund I am requesting?

Yes. Paraphrasing the words of Abraham Lincoln: Issuing me the refund to which I am entitled shows that others may also receive theirs if they do their work to prepare the grounds for requesting it.

2. Would a refund to me place any added burdens on the rest of the population that is not at this time requesting a refund?

No. The burden is introduced by the issuers of the Monetized Debt who expropriate the public's wealth directly by 100% with every unit denomination at the moment of issuance.

3. Would it be true to say that being LEGAL COUNTERFEIT, Fed. "Notes" are still used by me to get the food I eat and the cloths I wear?

* * * * * * * *

78

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 18, May 5, 1978

No! I am really BARTERING what I SURRENDERED to get the Fed "Note", FOR WHATEVER I get by passing it on. Removing the worthless Fed. "Note" entirely would not effect that EXCHANGE REALITY!

4. Would it be true to say I "SPEND" Fed. "Notes"?

No! To "SPEND" would indicate exchanging a value, and Fed. "Notes" do not have any value per se; they "EXCHANGE" exclusively on CONFIDENCE!

5. Would it be equitable to allow me to withdraw from the CONFIDENCE GAME that everyone else is perpetuating?

Yes! No one should be FORCED to commit unlawful acts merely to conform with a majority acting unwittingly in ignorance of the law. [Exodus 23.2 - ed.]

6. Would it be true to say that if no one was perpetuating the CONFIDENCE GAME, Government would not be able to finance its expenditures?

No! If everyone returned immediately to only paying lawful taxes, and stopped playing the CONFIDENCE GAME, Government would continue to deficit spend; they are able to CREATE whatever they need!

7. Why would restricting the LEGAL TENDER ACTS make things any better?

REDEEMABLE currency would NEGATE creation of NON-REDEEMABLE currency resulting in ZERO inflation!

8. Would the use of redeemable currency allow progress and growth as usual?

Yes! Doing away with inflation ENTIRELY would guarantee it.

9. Would rescinding the LEGAL TENDER ACTS mean monetary collapse and chaos?

No; But retaining the LEGAL TENDER ACTS will eventually cause a Monetary Collapse and chaos.

10. Would the return to FREE CÖINAGE allow the United States to progress as it has in the past?

Yes! Coupled with recent technical advances our standard of living would literally leap ahead!

* * * * * * * *

79

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 19, May 5, 1978

Perhaps I should allow you an opportunity to formulate some questions.

Do not hesitate to ask me to justify any answer with documentation. I assure you I am thoroughly capable of providing documentation to substantiate the conclusions I have attempted to make understandable in this continuing correspondence. No one is above the law, and certainly the perpetrators of this HOAX and Its perpetuation would seem to deserve some correction.

Please do not hesitate to correct me If my conclusions are wrong. I am familiar with all the arguments In support of this HOAX and consider myself ready and able to refute each and every one.

I believe I am fully aware of the awesome power of the Internal Revenue Service. Its power has been demonstrated many time in its short history. It has been used as the mighty arm of the State in crushing its enemies, such as Al Capone. It has been used by Presidents as a pseudo GESTAPO to punish political dissidents. At present it appears to be directed against law abiding, U.S. Constitution supporting, citizens of this great nation. The FEAR so many of us feel towards the Internal Revenue Service, because of its past and present abuses, should be removed.

The Internal Revenue Service should never be permitted to step beyond the U.S. Constitutional bounds set for its creator. The Internal Revenue Service should be governed by the same laws as the people. The Internal Revenue Service apparent practice of making "laws" against the people should be thoroughly investigated. The Internal Revenue Service should not have powers beyond those of Congress. Congress cannot delegate to others powers it does not have itself.

THE LAW ABIDINGPUBLIC SHOULD NEVER BE PROSECUTED FOR UPHOLDING THE LAW!

THE LAW ABIDING PUBLIC OF THIS GREAT NATION SHOULD NEVER BE CONSIDERED AN ENEMY OF THE STATE!

WE THE PEOPLE, established the Constitution. The Declaration of Independence clearly expresses:

"We hold these truths to self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

* * * * * * * *

80

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 20, May 5, 1978

The Constitution clearly expresses:

ARTICLE IX:

"The enumeration of the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

ARTICLE X:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

HOW IS IT POSSIBLE FOR AN AGENCY, ESTABLISHED BY THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE, TO HOLD ITSELF ABOVE THE PEOPLE AND TREAT ITS CREATOR AS ITS ENEMY?

ARTICLE IV:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, . . . "

ARTICLE V:

"No person shall, . . . be compelled . . . . to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." (please refer back to pages 6, 7, and 8 of this correspondence.)

It is now clear to many people that for "INCOME TAXES" to have been "functional" at all they had to be voluntary excursions beyond the laws by those participating. Unfortunately the population as a whole is still mostly unaware of this fact. No one would try or could actually alert everyone with this message over-night. The people will have to respond as they become aware. I have finally become aware and I am respectfully requesting a refund and declaring my desire to act lawfully according to the U.S. Constitution. I am sincerely concerned that I "over-paid" and want to clear this matter and my conscience as soon as possible with the least amount of argument.

* * * * * * * *

81

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 21, May 5, 1978

I am aware of the heavy "work load" of the Internal Revenue Service at this time of the year. However, it is necessary for me, for obvious reasons, to make my request at the first instance of awareness. I do not wish any special expediting procedures to be given my request.

If the refund check is already in the mail please disregard this correspondence.

Sincerely,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to various personal friends and Interested officials.

* * * * * * * *

82

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

83

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Richard C. Voskuil.
District Director, Internal Revenue Service,
1124 Market Street,
St. Louis. Missouri, 63101

Additional grounds in Support of Request for Refund:
Refer to correspondence of April 21, 1978, May 5, 1978

May 16, 1978

Dear Sir:

My last correspondence touched upon the fact that Fed. "Notes" as paper "dollar bills" are accepted, in good faith, by the non-bank public. I also touched upon their nature as being counterfeit. At this point I would like to concentrate for a moment on the specific detail of this counterfeit. Specifically I wish to show just how an Intelligent non-bank public can be duped into believing all sorts of rationalizations that are absolutely groundless. I would like to expose the exact nature of a Federal Reserve "Note" and "its" ability, through Government and commercial bank collusion, to fool all of the people all of the time.

We can all SEE a Federal Reserve "Note" ("dollar bill"), and yet somehow it is accepted for WHAT it is NOT: IF it was a note it would bear a promise of payment, which it does not. You may scan It with whatever visual aid you wish and yet nowhere on it is there a written or implied promise.

Psychologically it is accepted as being the same as some of its predecessors that bore inscriptions reading:

"PAYABLE TO THE BEARER ON DEMAND"

What was payable on demand? NOT the note; the bearer already had that: The piece of paper that was called a dollar was a TOKEN. A TOKEN is anything that REPRESENTS what IT IS NOT! The piece of paper that WAS called a dollar was a TOKEN, take a claim check, that could be surrendered for the thing it represented.

IF YOU PUT A SUITCASE IN A CHECKROOM AND RECEIVED A CLAIM CHECK. THE CLAIM CHECK IS A TOKEN REPRESENTING YOUR CLAIM TO YOUR SUITCASE. YOU CAN RETURN LATER, SURRENDER THE CLAIM CHECK (TOKEN) AND RECEIVE YOUR SUITCASE.

What then was the thing that the "dollar bill" token represented ? What was it that could be received by Its bearer upon surrender of it?

* * * * * * * *

84

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 2, May 16, 1978

"MONEY" WAS THE THING THAT COULD BE RECLAIMED!

Gold and silver coinage was the thing "checked" and the gold and/or silver certificate was the token which bore the inscription that a ONE DOLLAR QUANTITY was PAYABLE to the bearer on demand (upon surrender of the claim check).

The piece of paper ("dollar bill") was called 'dollar bill' because of its nature of being like a bill or invoice that called for the payment of a DOLLAR QUANTITY of silver and/or gold to its bearer upon presentation to the one named on the invoice. The full text of the silver certificate read:

"SILVER CERTIFICATE. THIS CERTIFIES THAT THERE IS ON DEPOSIT IN THE TREASURY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ONE DOLLAR IN SILVER PAYABLE TO THE BEARER ON DEMAND."

Those words are extremely clear and their meaning quite distinct. A dollar in silver, not a 'dollar' per se, but a dollar in silver was payable to the bearer on demand. Dollar was a quantity of money. Money was measured in dollars; dollars were not money, but a unit of measure. A dollar quantity of silver and/or gold was a unit like 'peck', bushel or barrel. Anyone entering a warehouse and asking for a 'peck' would in turn, be asked: "a peck of what?" Anyone asking for a 'bushel' would again be queried: "a bushel of what?" And so it would go, you cannot have a meaningful use of a quantity term without specifying what it applied to. Dollar and money are two different terms, one applies to a medium of exchange (money) and the other applies to the quantity thereof (dollar).

The Federal Reserve "Note" bears an inscription 'ONE DOLLAR', but nothing more. Why do we accept it as being something it does not claim to be? The silver certificate inscription read in part: ". . . THIS CERTIFIES THAT THERE IS ON DEPOSIT. . ."; nowhere on a Federal Reserve "Note" ("dollar bill") is there any mention of anything being on deposit.

The silver certificate inscription read in part: ". . . PAYABLE TO THE BEARER ON DEMAND . . ."; nowhere on the Federal Reserve "Note" ("dollar bill") is there any mention of payment of anyone. Why do we accept it as being a claim on anything? First is does not specify anything on deposit. Second it does not promise payment to anyone, and third it does not even specify any connection to 'money' at all.

WHAT WOULD IT MEAN TO ANYONE IF YOU PROCLAIMED: "I HAVE TWENTY PECKS" --- OF WHAT?

* * * * * * * *

85

MERRILL M.E. JENICINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 3, May 16, 1978

If you proclaimed: "I have twenty bushels" ---- of what?

If you proclaimed: "I have twenty inches" --- of what?

If you proclaimed: "I have twenty quarts" --- of what?

BUT! WHEN YOU PROCLAIM; "I HAVE TWENTY DOLLARS" --- AHHH ---

here is where the human mind immediately equates that with "its parity" in goods. Twenty 'dollars' will buy one bag of groceries. 40 gallons of gasoline or 80 Tennis balls, etc.

BUT WHY DO WE DO THAT? TWENTY DOLLARS WORTHOF WHAT IS EQUAL TO ONE BAG OF GROCERIES, 40 GALLONS OF GASOLINE OR 80 TENNIS BALLS.

We are attaching an exchange value to a piece of paper equal to what we would give up to get is --- BASED UPON ---- our belief of what we could get for it ourselves, later, from someone else. We are believing that the token does not have to be a claim check on anything to FUNCTION as a token REPRESENTING something. And we imagine THAT SOMETHING to be comparable in value to what we are willing to surrender to get the piece of paper. All this because we accept that the WORD 'dollar' written on a piece of paper, has changed, that the QUANTITY specification has become the THING it measured; that the abstract term for measurement has become the measured thing; that the EXPRESSION of quantity of a NOT-STATED THING has magically become that NOT-STATED THING ITSELF.

WHY WOULD WE THINK SUCH A THING? HOW CAN AN EXPRESSION SUDDENLY / MAGICALLY BECOME AN ENTITY? WHY ARE WE ABLE TO ACCEPT THE WORD 'DOLLAR' AL BEING ANYTHING TANGIBLE? BECAUSE WE ARE ALL ACCEPTING A REASONABLE AND LOGICAL SUPERSTRUCTURE BUILT UPON A FALSE PREMISE.

The False premise:

"That 'money' does not have to be worth anything to function as money."

The reasonable and logical superstructure:

"Each one of us must work to get 'dollars' therefore we expect everyone else to work to get 'dollars' from us."

* * * * * * * *

86

MERRILL M.E. JENICINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 4, May 16,1978

The Fallacy:

"The people accept the Fed. "Notes" as being the 'money'. Fed. 'Notes' are printed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The Fed. "Notes" are used to acquire the paper, ink and labor required to produce them.

THE PRINTER AND ISSUER GET EVERYTHING FOR NOTHING!

ONLY THE NON-BANK PUBLIC MUST WORK FOR EVERYTHING!

If paper had to be 100% redeemable NO-ONE could get everything for nothing."

The word 'money' in all Instances above is used as the public accepts it, as a medium of exchange. The text before that brings out, that what we have been calling 'money', are the paper tokens that represent an imagined, non-specified, medium of exchange. It is obvious that a quantity specification cannot be a material thing, therefore all the tokens could represent is DEBT ITSELF! And that is a truth --- STRANGER THAN FICTION!

In the United States the Federal Reserve "Notes" we call 'money' are paper tokens representing DEBT as a medium of exchange and the system is called: "THE MONETIZATION OF DEBT."

"I doubt that monetization of debt has been a conscious act on the part of the Government or on the part of the federal Reserve System . . . I can find no benefits accruing to the whole of society from debt monetization, but the risks are very serious and can be expressed in one word -- INFLATION,"

Statement by Darryl R. Francis Former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Mo. before the Committee of Banking & Currency, in the House of Representatives in Washington , D. C, on July 18, 1974.

The Federal Reserve System, as the monetary authority of the United States, has the only OPEN ENDED checking account in the United States. Even the U.S. Treasury must borrow from the PRIVATE FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS! The Treasury DELIVERS the Federal Reserve "Notes" to the PRIVATE FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS for distribution, as tokens to represent the "monetized" BORROWER'S DEBT and to function as 'money' for the non-bank public.

* * * * * * * *

87

MERRILL M.E. JENICINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 5, May 16,1978

All the expenses of paper, ink, and labor are "paid" for with the tokens. There is nothing on deposit that can be claimed in exchange. The tokens do not specify that they are a claim on anything. It is an assumption on the part of the non-bank public. The terrible consequences is that as time passes the tokens accumulate. There isn't any way to diminish the ever accelerating quantity of tokens being issued. Without some thing to redeem (which would retire the token) their quantity cannot be reduced and they are bid In ever larger quantities per unit of goods.

The tokens "depreciate", "prices rising", until the drain on production, the tokens facilitate, leaves too little for the actual producers of goods to share.

"The gains which accrue to issuers of money are derived from the difference between the costs of issuing money and the initial purchasing power of new money in circulation. Such gains are called "seigniorage." If the goods and services for which the issuer exchanges money have a market value greater than that of resources used to produce the money, then the issuer receives a net gain."

Fed. Res. Bank. of St. Louis, Review February 1975 p 15.

THE LAST TWO WORDS OF THE ABOVE QUOTE ARE A PREEMINENT PEARL OF UNDERSTATEMENT, FOR THE NET GAIN IS AT ALL TIMES 100% TO THE ISSUERS;

THIS LEAVES A TOTAL OF ZERO GAIN FOR THE PRODUCERS UPON WHICH TO LEVY AN "INCOME" 'TAX'! HOW?

The issuers "pay" all "costs" with the tokens created, and since the tokens cannot redeem anything, then they are worth nothing, and everything anyone gives for them is a 100% gain to the issuer. This leaves nothing for the producer upon which to place a tax! When a token is worth nothing, the SEIGNIORAGE is 100%. The present copper-nickel "coinage" is only 3% worth by the Coinage Act of 1965 which allowed a seigniorage of 97%. But the 3% worth, copper-nickel token coinage was "PAID" for with "MONETIZED DEBT", tokens which made the 'cost' of them to the issuer: ZERO!

The embezzlement of production FROM those who produce, to those who DO NOT produce, but ISSUE "money", will continue until the embezzlement of production leaves too little for the producer, and the non-bank public begins to starve. The non-bank public will resort to barter and the monetized debt system, with its Fed. "Notes" will collapse.

* * * * * * * *

88

MERRILL M.E Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 6. May 16,1978

Since the duped producers accept Fed. "Notes" as 'money', and the Fed. "Notes" are printed by Government in violation of United States Law:

"Since the direct method of printing money to finance Government expenditures is prohibited in the U.S., the monetization of Government deficits has occured indirectly,"

Fed. Res. Bank of St. Louis, August 1974 p. 5,

the government should only print enough for the public to pay its taxes with. That would be all they are entitled to. If they print more than they have coming in taxes, that would be COUNTERFEITING, would it not? The government could not spend MORE than they print, but they could PRINT AND SPEND more than they have coming in taxes. That must be what they call 'DEFICIT SPENDING'.

The non-bank public has to offer production or perform a service to obtain currency. That is why the system "works" because everyone has to work to obtain "dollars", therefore they expect everyone else to work to obtain "dollars", except Government, which has the right to tax the public.

SINCE GOVERNMENT IS OBTAINING EVERYTHING IT WANTS FOR NOTHING THROUGH INDIRECT VIOLATION OF LAW, WHY DOES IT ADD INSULT TO INJURY BY TAXING THE PEOPLE?

Presumably government uses the currency it takes in taxes to spend for the goods and services it requires to operate. Presumably the public uses the currency it does receive with which to pay the taxes. WHY DOES government have to print so much, all the time? Some is needed to replace old and worn currency. Some is needed to accommodate expansion.

BUT THE PRODIGIOUS AMOUNTS BEING PRINTED CANNOT BE FOR JUST THOSE TWO REASONS.

Why does the government print so much currency? What do they do with it when they are finished printing it? If they print it and have it why don't they spend it into circulation or is that what is done? If they spend it into circulation and print such prodigious amounts of it, why does the government have to borrow?

We know the government prints it. We know the people have to work to get it. HOW DO THE BANKS GET IT TO LOAN TO THE PEOPLE AND GOVERNMENT?

* * * * * * * *

89

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 7, May 16,1978

If the banks get it from the government why does the government have to pay interest to the banks when they borrow it back? Why do they have to borrow it back when they had it in the first place, why didn't they just use it? If they just use it, that would be unfair, if what they used exceeded what they had coming in taxes. However, they are printing prodigious amounts of it. What is being done with it? Who gets it and for what?

In the old days, before this MODERN money, the printed currency was all silver and gold certificates. There was silver or gold on deposit that could be redeemed with the certificates and surrendering the certificate took it out of circulation.

Gold and silver coin had to be on deposit for redemption of the certificate outstanding. Government could not print more certificates than there was gold and silver on deposit to be redeemed. We knew exactly who got the certificates printed by the government. Whoever deposited gold and/or silver coin got gold and/or silver certificates as receipts of the deposit.

WHO DEPOSITS WHAT, TO GET THE MODERN "MONEY"?

Government printed a modest amount of currency to replace old worn out currency, and some additional to cover new deposits of gold and/or silver, but never the prodigious amounts as now.

WHAT IS INCREASING AT SUCH PRODIGIOUS RATES THAT IT CAN JUSTIFY THIS ACCELERATING ACCELERATION OF THE CURRENCY VOLUME? IT IS NOT GOLD AND IT IS NOT SILVER --- WHAT IS IT?

Government printing such huge volumes of "money", far exceeding any claim on taxes, MUST BE PRINTING IT TO REPRESENT SOMETHING. The currency being printed does not have anything ON DEPOSIT to REPRESENT! The currency cannot ever be removed from circulation in the old way -- by redeeming a deposit -- THERE ISN'T ANY DEPOSIT TO REDEEM!

IT MUST REPRESENT SOMETHING THAT IS GROWING AT THE SAME PRODIGIOUS RATE AS THE MONEY VOLUME. SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE DEPOSITED AND YET ESTABLISHES A LINK BETWEEN THE PRINTING OF CURRENCY AND WHO GETS IT TO SPEND!

WHEN I FINALLY DISCOVERED THE TRUTH, IT ASTOUNDED ME.

* * * * * * * *

90

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 8, May 16,1978

"One reason why economists are in such disrepute is that they have pretended to understand inflation and to know how to control it, when obviously we do not."

Wassily Leontieff, Nobel-Prize winning economist
New York Times January 30, 1977 p. 3.

"The rules of economics don' t seem to work like they are supposed to,"

Arthur F· Burns, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board
New York Times January 30. 1977 p. 3.

No wonder our trained and learned Nobel-Prize winning economists could not discover it. Their minds could never conceive that a condition like this could develop. The answer is accurate but thoroughly unbelievable.

The only thing growing at the same prodigious rate at which currency is being printed is DEBT. The currency is being printed to represent DEBT. When a borrower accepts the liability of a loan he receives money. The DEEPER IN DEBT he goes THE MORE MONEY HE RECEIVES. The currency looks the same as the old gold and/or silver certificates that were issued when gold and/or silver was deposited. The new Federal Reserve "Notes" are paper and are issued, not upon deposits being made, but upon loans being made. Currency for which there is nothing on deposit cannot represent anything except THE BORROWERS DEBT, therefore anyone accepting a liability is entitled to the currency representing their debt. The quantity of currency received is commensurate with the volume of their loan.

No self-respecting economist could possibly accept a concept that "boils-down" to: THE DEEPER IN DEBT YOU GO THE RICHER YOU BECOME!

IT IS TOO FANTASTIC AND UNBELIEVABLE, BUT THE EVIDENCE OF ITS BEING IS IRREFUTABLE. THE DEBT VOLUME AND MONEY VOLUME ARE BOTH GROWING AT PRODIGIOUS AND RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS.

The very fact that currency can be spent, and the currency is given to those going into debt, gives the system its name. The Modern Money system is called the MONETIZATION OF DEBT.

Making DEBT 'SPENDABLE' is quite an invention, and it is in FULL OPERATION, THOUGH HOW TO JUSTIFY IT, DEFIES ME!

* * * * * * * *

91

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 9, May 16,1978

There is proof that some recognition of this condition does exist.

"Expansion of Central Bank holdings of Government debt provides the Treasury with funds just as certainly as increased output of its engraving and printing facilities."

Fed. Res. Bank of St. Louis Review February 1975 p 17.

Debt is "spendable", but the currency issued to represent it and make it "spendable", is not 'collectable' from the issuer. The issuers of the currency are not producers of goods. The issuers can never be called upon to give up anything for currency. The debt represented by the currency is used by its issuer to obtain production without any fear of ever having to 'pay' for it. The issuers of currency get everything it "buys" for nothing. The producers never become aware of their loss because they never suspect the truth.

THE PRODUCERS ALL EXCHANGE THE CURRENCY WITH ONE ANOTHER GIVING AND RECEIVING IN TURN, USING THE CURRENCY AS A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE. IT NEVER OCCURS TO THE PRODUCERS THAT THE ISSUERS GET THE CURRENCY FOR NOTHING AND WILL NOT GIVE ANYTHING FOR IT.

How could any self-respecting economists admit to being a part of a system like that if he truly understood it? There is a possible touch of remorse in the words of Darryl R. Francis then President of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis before the Committee on Banking and Currency, House of Representatives, July 18, 1974:

"I doubt that monetization of debt has a been conscious act on the part of the Government or on the part of the Federal Reserve System. Rather, I believe the reason it has occurred lies in the relative visibility of the three methods of financing Government expenditures- -taxes, borrowing from the public, and indirect debt monetization . . . . in the case of debt monetization, the immediate and even the short-run impact is neither an increase in taxes, nor an increase in interest rates. And yet, real resources still are being transferred from private to government use."

* * * * * * * *

92

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 10, May 16,1978

The above quote points out that through DEBT MONETIZATION it is possible to steal without being found out. Stealing is what debt monetization really is when it is analyzed from any objective viewpoint. How can an economist trained in these matters be around it for so long without seeing a truth so obvious?

With currency being printed in such prodigious quantities, how come they do not ask themselves who is getting it? For what? Why?

FOR WHAT? WHY? --- FOR WHAT? WHY? --- FOR WHAT? WHY?

THOUSANDS OF ECONOMISTS WORLD WIDE AND NO ONE CAN SEE THIS IS STEALING? I AM AMAZED AND FULL OF WONDERMENT AT A PROFESSION THAT FLOUNDERS AROUND TRYING TO OUTGUESS ONE ANOTHER AS TO WHAT IS WRONG, WHY RULES OF ECONOMICS DO NOT SEEM TO WORK LIKE THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO. IT ONLY TOOK A FEW PAGES HERE TO REASON OUT THAT NO AMOUNT OF DEBT CAN ELIMINATE DEBT. ANY MULTI-YEAR EXCURSION INTO THE REALM OF FANTASY AND NONSENSE MUST END IN DISASTER.

There are only two conclusions I can come to: Either the entire economist membership is totally incompetent, or they are united in their efforts to prevent the panic that will surety come when the non-bank public finds out.

In the words of Jacques Rueff 1961:

"It is the product of a prodigious collective error which will remain in history and will eventually be recognized as an object of astonishment and scandal."

The error was in ever believing it would not be found out. Stealing is stealing, no matter what cloak of respectability is applied. "Relative visibility" (Darryl R. Francis quote above) is an innocent sounding phrase, but in this case what is being HIDDEN is THEFT. Theft of not only wealth and labor, but the means of communicating intelligence itself, our LANGUAGE.

Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul was always considered improper, but now we accept it with the title: DEBT RESTRUCTURING.

* * * * * * * *

93

MERRILL M.E Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 11, May 16,1978

In the thirties when the con-man Ponsi paid previous investors profit from the funds of current investors in a financial pyramid scheme, it was recognized and considered fraud, but now we accept it when the United States Treasury 'rolls-over' TREASURY BILLS.

ROBIN HOOD practiced the return to taxpayers of some of the taxes collected from them in a pseudo REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH. He was an outlaw, but today we accept the same activity from government under the new title: REVENUE SHARING.

BRIBERY is a criminal offense, but dressed-up in a new title: LOBBYING -- it has become respectable.

The CON-MAN'S most nasty scam of offering "SOMETHING FOR NOTHING" on a show of 'good faith' is the PIGEON DROP, but we must accept it today, from government, with its new title: MATCHING FUNDS.

Chicago and New York were big victims, at one time, of an EXTORTION RACKET that robbed the public of part of their earnings; today we complain, but continue to be coerced into "paying" it under its new title: INCOME TAX.

A MUGGING, where an individual losses part of his personal property is a crime, but not if it is legally sanctioned, by government, as PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX.

All of the above has come about because of a gradual economy-destroying change that has been inflicted upon our monetary system. We had a system using certificates of ownership of private property as mediums of exchange. We are now using a system consisting entirely of "bankers' credit" with the title: 'Monetization of debt'. Monetizing borrower's debt (using debt as "money") makes some queer things appear practical.

It used to be a fact that it was impossible to eliminate debt by borrowing, but now under the new system, borrowing creates debt and debt is "money," so the more we borrow the richer we become, but the massive total debt keeps increasing. The economy is failing and the economists tell us the old economic laws are no longer working the way they used to! Perhaps it is time the American people were brought face to face with a reality. A monetary system has been sanctioned that is about to shock the world. The economy destroying change has come about so gradually that it comes as a shock, when we are forced to recognize the true nature of our newly accepted monetary principles:

BORROWING ONE'S SELF OUT OF DEBT = DEBT RESTRUCTURING

PONSI GAME PYRAMIDING -------------------- = TREASURY BILL ROLL-OVER

ROBIN HOODERY --------------------------------- = REVENUE SHARING

* * * * * * * *

94

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 12, May 16,1978

BRIBERY ------------------------------------------------------- = LOBBYING

PIGEON DROP -------------------------------------------- = MATCHING FUNDS

EXTORTION -------------------------------------------------- = INCOME TAX

LEGAL MUGGING ------------------------------------------ = PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX

Without a medium of exchange based on private property, the world is using a system of monetized debt; but the monetization of debt makes it impossible to pay-off a debt. Borrowing to get out of debt is impossible! Interest is intangible and cannot be paid because you cannot return more than you borrow from an only source. Appointment of a Monetary Authority makes slaves out of all who must accept its 'money'. The primary function of 'money' (monetized debt) is the expropriation of private property and labor. Only those who know the rules can play the game to win.

THERE IS NOT NOW, NOR HAS THERE EVER BEEN, A LAW OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND. SUPPLY, DEMAND, GOODS, AND SERVICES ARE IDENTICAL QUADRUPLETS; 'RESULTS OF LABOR' AS 'OBJECTS OF EXCHANGE'.

'Money' as the monetization of debt is INTANGIBLE and must be REPRESENTED by TOKENS (coins and bills) which enter and leave banks like poker chips in a poker game. A TOKEN, however, is no part of the thing it represents! 'Money' never enters or leaves the banking system. No one has ever seen or touched any modern 'money', only the tokens that represent it, but the non-bank public is not permitted to make their own tokens.

Currencies today are only tokens of monetized debt and can only function as mediums of exchange by sheer imagination. They cannot be barter or final settlement of a debt. Gold and silver coins were not 'money' but were mediums of exchange that could be barter, and final settlement of all debts - LAWFULLY! Any tangible private property can be barter or a medium of exchange. Warehouse certificates for any commodity are excellent mediums of exchange. Lincoln green-backs were FIAT of limited issue but scarcity does not increase value. No currency can ever be "BACKED" because currency could not purchase its own backing or be backed by what it purchases. Deflation of the 'money' accumulated to date would not eliminate the total debt because only 'money' can be deflated, not the interest. We have very little time remaining in which to turn inevitable monetary collapse into a concerted effort to avoid that collapse.

There are twenty two startling statements concerning the present, modern monetary system in the above text. They are accurate and true facts, but are not spoken of by the economists and economic professors of today.

* * * * * * * *

95

MERR1LL M.E Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 13, May 16,1978

Taxing authorities appear to be as oblivious as the economists to these truths, but what ever happened to: 'ignorance is no excuse'? I am endeavoring to bring these truths to you so that you may make the proper decisions to avoid being held accountable by virtue of: 'ignorance of the law is no excuse'.

Basically all government is supposed to rest upon the consent of the governed; in reality, government only rests on the consent of the governed if the governed have PROPERTY RIGHTS. Government is force, hired by the people to protect them from each other, from outside forces, and even from bad government itself.

"The prime function of government is the protection of the different and unequal faculties of men for acquiring property."

JAMES MADISON

"There should be no war upon property or the owners of property. Property is the fruit of labor; property is desireabIe; is a positive good in the world. That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, hence, is just encouragement to industry and enterprise."

ABRAHAM LINCOLN

". . . a wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. . . . "

THOMAS JEFFERSON

"No other rights are safe where property is not safe!"

DANIEL WEBSTER

"The right of distribution over private property is the essence of freedom."

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

The facts are that people produce wealth (private property) by employing their labor (human exertion) to bring forth the Earth's resources as useful products to exchange with each other in a free market.

* * * * * * * *

96

MERRILL M.E JEN KINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 14, May 16,1978

WEALTH IS PRIVATE PROPERTY, PRODUCED BY HUMAN EXERTION, HAVING EXCHANGE VALUE!

Governments do not produce wealth and must rely on the people who create wealth to support the operations of government. Government must obtain its wealth from the people before it can distribute that wealth in payment for the services it contracts for.

It is exactly HOW government acquires the wealth of the people that determines whether or not they have GOOD government. If government is GOOD, responsive to the WILL OF THE PEOPLE, the people pay for the services of government at its cost, and do so willingly and sincerely.

The united States Constitution stipulates that the cost of government is to be paid by the citizens on an equal basis by the numbers, everyone paying his uniform, equal share. IF this law were maintained, it could truthfully be said that "government rests on the consent of the governed."

Today in the United States the people and their government are influenced by an INVISIBLE FORCE that RULES like the RULERS of old. The exact method by which this is accomplished has already been explained (money-credit-inflation-monetized debt). The conclusions are inescapable; the explanation is not difficult, but understanding must be desired to be acquired.

Government cannot rule with wealth, because government does not produce wealth. People can rule with wealth, because people do produce wealth. But people can only rule with wealth, IF they RETAIN the ownership and right of distribution of their wealth. If people provide the wealth to government willingly and sincerely, then government policies are directed by the people, because if government did not follow the will of the people they would withdraw their support.

IF GOVERNMENT IS TO RULE THE PEOPLE IT MUST ACQUIRE THE PEOPLE'SWEALTH BY SOME OTHER MEANS. If government takes the people's wealth by force, it runs the risk of revolt. GOVERNMENT MUST FIND SOME HIDDEN MEANS TO ACQUIRE THE PEOPLE'S WEALTH WITHOUT THE PEOPLE BECOMING AWARE!

If government can acquire the wealth of its people by invisible means, then it can do as it pleases, and the people's willing and sincere support will not be required. This is exactly how we have come to be a nation of citizens ruled by a bureaucratic government, the control of which no longer rests in the hands of the people. We lost control of our government when we lost the right of PRIVATE PROPERTY (the right to distribute our own earned wealth in our own way).

* * * * * * * *

97

Merrill M.E. Jenkins SR., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 15, May 16,1978

"All the perplexities, confusions and distresses in America arise not from defects in the constitution or confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, as much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation!"

JOHN ADAMS

The United States Constitution stipulated that Congress could COIN "money" and regulate the value thereof; but the common commodity mediums of exchange in use were gold and silver coins (wealth), and they were called 'money'. It did not matter that WEALTH was called "MONEY" because, as long as it WAS 'WEALTH' that was used, the WEALTH EXPROPRIATION result of using "money" was not present.

The fact -- IS -- the use of "money" in those days meant the use of gold and silver coin, and the Constitution stipulation then meant that Congress could coin, gold and silver and regulate the quantity of the precious metal used in the various coin denominations.

Nowhere in the united States Constitution is permission granted to the Treasury to create paper currency or Treasury bonds, yet this is the means by which our wealth is being removed from our control without our consent or awareness. The system is complex, fantastic and unbelievable, but it is true. The system also creates an invisible force over government, and through government over the people. A force so powerful that it can keep the people unaware of its existence, and even when informed of its existence, compel the people to resist acknowledgment.

The people have to be kept believing that they are still influencing their government through their elected officials and that all is as it was. The effort is being constantly made to keep them believing there are two political parties and that they are in opposition, when in reality both parties are controlled to a considerable extent by this force that is able to invisibly extract the wealth of the people by means of a law passed by government, which makes government from that day forward a victim of its own Act, the Federal Reserve Act.

Then, in fact, a government cannot rule with wealth, a government elected by the people can function as a government guided by its citizens (the governed) only if the citizens retain the right of private property and willingly and sincerely give of their wealth to support that government.

Then, in fact, when any invisible means exists whereby the people can be relieved of private property without recourse, then the creator of that invisible means actually gains considerable control over the people's government and through government the people.

* * * * * * * *

98

MERR1LL M.E. JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 16, May 16,1978

The government is no longer responsible to the people, but has its policies directed by the creators and issuers of the medium whereby all bills are paid, and all economic and political functions are financed.

Once a false medium is accepted by the people in exchange for the wealth they produce (private property) that false medium will be used to acquire their means of production, ownership of their sources of resources, their means of communication and commutation. It has happened and the government of the people, by the people, for the people has already perished from the face of the Earth.

The invisible force (private owners of Fed. System), controlling government from behind the scenes, is protected by a cloak of invisibility, is endeavoring by all means at its disposal to keep the people believing that the government has not changed and that all benefit from the expropriation of wealth benefits the "State", when INFLATION (monetized debt) is referred to at all, it is called a "HIDDEN TAX" OF GOVERNMENT.

"Money", "credit", "INFLATION", "seigniorage" and "monetized debt are all EXACTLY THE SAME "THING"-- imaginary "PURCHASING" POWER! The imaginary 'monetized debt', "dollar" numerical quantities are created on the books of the Federal Reserve, a system of private corporations, for profit. The situation is such that all economic and political functions depend on their created "debt dollars" being continually created to add to the accumulation already there. Any sudden stoppage of that system would cause instant chaos in the world.

What must be done is that WE THE PEOPLE must get back the right to own private property (abolish legal tender Acts) and control the distribution of the wealth (private property) we create with our human exertion. Once we have reestablished our rights of ownership and can again make valid contracts, all the injustices that have existed since the 'MONETIZATION OF DEBT' will die on the vine.

Who would use worthless, irredeemable paper for economic transactions if real wealth were available as a medium of exchange? With the return of our right of contract and private property, and its result, the demise of monetized debt, we would find that the control of government, good government, would return, and the United States would again be the land of the FREE.

ONCE THIS TERRIBLE MONOPOLY HAS BEEN CREATED WITH MONETIZED DEBT, IT SHOULD BE TOTALLY OBVIOUS IT CANNOT BE DESTROYED WITH THE VERY ELIXIR THAT GAVE IT LIFE. MONETIZED DEBT WILL IN TIME DESTROY ITSELF, FOR THE SEEDS OF ITS OWN DESTRUCTION ARE SEWN WITHIN IT, BUT IT CANNOT BE USED BY OTHERS TO DESTROY ITS CREATOR.

* * * * * * * *

99

MERR1LL M.E. JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 17, May 16,1978

ONLY THE CONGRESS THAT CREATED THE MONETARY AUTHORITY CAN RESCIND IT, HOWEVER, MONETIZED DEBT "MONEY" IS THE FORCE USED TO DIRECT THE POLICIES OF GOVERNMENT (CONGRESS). TO PREVENT THAT, IT WILL TAKE THE COMBINED WILL OF A GROUP OF ELIGHTENED PUBLIC APPLIED TO CONGRESS TO GET THE LEGAL TENDER ACTS RESCINDED.

THE NON-BANK PUBLIC WILL HAVE TO RETURN TO TANGIBLE MEDIUMS OF EXCHANGE TO DESTROY THE POWER OF MONETIZED DEBT BEFORE THE NON-BANK PUBLIC CAN AGAIN DIRECT THE POLICIES OF GOVERNMENT.

IT IS THE NON-BANK PUBLIC'S NATURAL RETURN TO BARTERING, DEFYING 'DEATH PENALTY' EDICTS OF GOVERNMENT, THAT REINTRODUCES THE TANGIBLE MEDIUMS OF EXCHANGE AND DESTROYS THE MONOPOLY OF MONETIZED DEBT!

"It sounds harsh, but it is a fact, that in the last analysis .the only way to impose state control of prices~-is to re-introduce the death penalty."

Dr. Heinz R. Wuffli, Member of the General Management of Credit Suisse,
in the booklet -- The Monetary Crisis in the Light of Contemporary History, p. l3.

There is only one entity to whom Modern Money is unlimited. It is the Federal Reserve System that has an open ENDED checking account. The Federal Reserve System through its "MONETIZED DEBT" (modern "money" represented by non-redeemable paper "currency") is the SUPREME FORCE -- WHOSE WILL IS LAW in the United States.

WHOEVER WOULD RETURN THE 'WILL OF THE PEOPLE', TO THE PEOPLE, MUST FIRST RETURN THE UNITED STATES TO THE USE OF CONSTITUTIONAL COINAGE AS A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE, AND THROUGH IT, THE CONSTITUTION, AS LAW IN THE UNITED STATES.

* * * * * * * *

100

MERR1LL M.E. JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 18, May 16,1978

"It was finally decided, by the vote of nine states against New Jersey and Maryland, that the power to issue inconvertible paper should not be granted to the federal government . An express prohibition, such as had been adopted for the separate states, was thought unnecessary. It was supposed that it was enough to withhold the power, since the federal government would not venture to exercise it unless expressly permitted in the Constitution. "Thus," says Madison, in his narrative of the proceedings, "the pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making the bills a tender, either for public or private debts, was cut off," Nothing could be more clearly expressed than this. As Mr. Justice Field observes, in his able dissenting opinion in the recent case of Juilliard vs. Greenman, "if there be anything in the history of the Constitution which can be established with moral certainty, it is that the framers of that instrument intended to prohibit the issue of legal-tender notes both by the general government and by the states, and thus prevent interference with the contracts of private parties." Such has been the opinion of our ablest constitutional jurists, Marshall, Webster, Story, Curtis, and Nelson. There can be little doubt that, according to all sound principles of interpretation. the Legal Tender Act of 1862 was passed in flagrant violation of the Constitution."

THE CRITICAL PERIOD OF AMERICAN HISTORY 1783-1789.
by JOHN FISKE. Copyright 1888; Houghton Mifflin Company.
THE RIVERSIDE PRESS. Cambridge p. 275.

IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE CREATION OF A FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT WAS A DEVIOUS AND DECEITFUL DODGE TO CIRCUMVENT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE AS EXPRESSED BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION; IT IS A SITUATION THAT MUST BE CORRECTED. HOWEVER, NO ONE CAN CORRECT A FAULT, OF WHICH, HE IS UNAWARE!

* * * * * * * *

101

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 19, May 16,1978

"The world is Governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."

BEKJAMIN DISRAELI

Any one who has seen a "Magician" perform cannot deny the powerful effect of his illusion. He is billed as a "Magician", and we expect the illusion, and so it is entertainment. To say that truth is stranger than fiction is much easier than getting anyone to accept that premise. Yet, truth IS stranger than fiction. In the above quote, Benjamin Disraeli brings out how important 'viewpoint' is, by his reference to "behind the scenes." From a vantage point behind the "Magician", some of his "magic" may become exposed. Viewpoint is the deciding factor in exposing many false premises accepted as truth by the public. Some acknowledgment of this is accepted and can be proven by a well known saying: "you cannot judge a book by its cover." Well known and accepted as that saying may be, investigation will prove that more books are sold by 'title' and 'jacket' than by their content.

There seems to be no limit to which humans will not stretch their imagination to accept a false premise. I was once told, in no uncertain terms: "The truth will not sell." There is a great amount of evidence to support that statement, and yet I feel that if the truth will not sell, nothing else is worth selling. Truth is fact, correctness, actuality. reality, etc., not as something appears to be, but, what it actually is. To arrive at truth about anything, requires observation, calculation and deduction. Only theory is debatable, truth is final. The volume of what is accepted as truth, but is not, is far beyond any human's normal ability to accept. If this were not so, then truth would not be stranger than fiction.

The entire world, as the general public KNOWS IT, is NOT as it appears to be. What the public believes is true, is really false, and what is really true, they are not aware of and will not accept when informed." "The truth will not sell!" Shakespeare's 'As You Like It' contains the line: " All the world is a stage etc.," that is true. "All" the people are performing unaware that they are performing, in accordance with directions from a director, stage manager, and a scenario they are completely unaware of. The words of Benjamin Disraeli again "The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined . . . ." repeat: "THE WORLD IS GOVERNED.''

NO MENTION HERE OF NATIONS, COUNTRIES, OR MUNICIPALITIES, REPEAT: "THE WORLD IS GOVERNED."

* * * * * * * *

102

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 20, May 16,1978

Was Benjamin Disraeli wrong or is there an invisible force on Earth that directs the behavior of its occupants. That directs them to believe in nations, and nationalities, wars of aggression and greed, when in fact none of that is really true. It happens, and we see it happen, it is played out upon the stage for us to participate in. People are killed, wounded and missing-in-action, that is real only as long as we do not look into the "wings" or into the audience. This scenario is acted out on a stage that is the Earth itself. There is no "wings" or audience as SUCH.

THE STAGE AND THE THEATER IS ONE, THE PER-FORMERS AND THE AUDIENCE ARE ONE, AND THOSE FEW WHO ARE THE INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT ARE WHOLLY HIDDEN AMONGST US.

How can we PROVE the EXISTANCE of this UNKNOWN scenario?

How can we PROVE there is an UNSEEN director and stage manager?

1. Who is this invisible government?

2. What is its force?

3. Where does it get its power?

4. When will it end, if ever?

5. Why does it persist over the truth?

WHO: The invisible government of the world is its world-wide INTERDEPENDENT banking system:

WHAT: Its force is the "monies" of the world it creates, issues and controls.

WHERE: It gets its power from the fact that all "monies" today are MONETIZED DEBT. The PEOPLE'S CREDIT, "MONETIZED" by the banking system and used to control the people!

WHEN: It will end when its exposure will be accepted by the people and they refuse to use monetized debt as a medium of exchange.'

WHY: It persists over the truth because all the power of MODERN MONEY is used to subvert the truth and support belief in the false world the people 'see' all around them.

* * * * * * * *

103

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 21, May 16,1978

How can this small group of people, hidden within the main body, direct the policies of the body as a whole, without detection? It is possible because most people accept what they 'see' and what they hear without applying any tests for truth. When only gold and silver coin were used and called 'money'; it was believable that one nation might attack another to get needed material it could not "pay" for. But with modern money, created by the billions, and used to purchase with, why fight for something you can get with "modern money", which costs you nothing.

The people will believe that one country attacks another for chrome, or nickel, or copper, never realizing that with "modern money" it can be "bought" for nothing. Who could you not corrupt, if money were no object. What could you not "buy'; if money were no object (unlimited)? Where would you not go, when could you not use it? Why would you not use "modern money" if you were the one 'licensed' by the world to create it? You do not have to go beyond the pages of the Wall Street Journal to find this truth.

"In Kingston, Jamaica, this week, 20 representatives of the 128 members of the International Monetary Fund will be playing a marvelous game. The IMF Interim Committee - 10 delegates from the industrial nations, 10 from the developing countries - will create about $14 billion in fresh money, after they haggle over who gets to spend it, under what conditions.

The international bureaucrats assembled in the sunny spa don't normally admit that what they are doing is simply printing money; they describe the process as an expansion of IMF quotas. Nor is a printing press used. The IMF members - including the United States - merely agree that the IMF should write in its ledger that it has an extra $14 billion to lend to the poor and deserving.

Now this inflation-groggy world certainly does not need the injection of another $14 billion in base money, likely to be multiplied into a far larger addition to the world's money supply."

REVIEW AND OUTLOOK -- WALL STREET JOURNAL
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 7, 1976 p. l2.

Who created $14 billion?

"20 representatives of the 128 members of the International Monetary Fund,"

* * * * * * * *

104

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 22, May 16,1978

Who gets to spend it?

". . . after they haggle over who gets to spend it, under what conditions."

What exactly was the $14 billion?

". . . $14 billion in base money, likely to be multiplied into a far larger addition to the world's money supply."

". . . fresh money . . . ."

Where was the $14 billion created?

"In Kingston, Jamaica, . . ."

NOTE: "Dollars" being created outside the continental limits of the United States by nineteen foreigners.

When was the $14 billion created?

". . . this week . . . ."

(week January 5, 1976)

Why was the $14 billion created?

". . . to lend to the poor and deserving."

HOW WAS THE $14 BILLION CREATED?

" . . . the IMF should write in its ledger that it has an extra $14 billion to lend . . . ."

Did we really need another $14 billion?

". . . this inflation-groggy world certainly does not need the injection of another $14 billion . . . ."

AGAIN: how was $14 billion in NEW MONEY created?

BY TWENTY REPRESENTATIVES OF 128 MEMBERS OF THE I.M.F. MAKING-BELIEVE THEY HAVE IT -- MERELY -- BY AGREEING THAT THE I.M.F. SHOULD WRITE IN ITS LEDGER THAT IT HAD IT.

AGAIN: WHO DID THE HAGGLING OVER WHO GETS TO SPEND IT?

THE TWENTY REPRESENTATIVES THAT CREATED IT.

* * * * * * * *

105

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 23, May 16,1978

"Money power denounces, as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes."

WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN, 1896

"We have awakened forces that nobody is at all familiar with."

JOHN CONNALLY, NEWSWEEK, AUGUST 14, 1971.

"What 's at stake is nothing less than the economic order of the free world."

AUSTRIA'S then CENTRAL BANK CHIEF
WOLFGANG SCHMITZ, SEPTEMBER 11, 1972.

"Having participated in the early phases of the United States' fall from grace, and having anguished over each new step with diligent concern for the need to return promptly to the conditions of freedom for flows of goods and capital, I am beginning now to wonder whether I fully grasped the significance of what we were doing, at the time, and of the causes for the action we were initiating."

ROBERT V. ROOSA former ASST. SECY.
OF THE UNITED STATES TREASURY, JULY, 1973.

HOW CAN ANYONE BELIEVE IN A GROUP OF 'IN'-DEPENDENT NATIONALISTIC NATIONS --- WHEN THEY ARE ALL 'INTER'-DEPENDENT THROUGH THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND, OR THE TRADE-RELATED BANKING SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD.

"Those who create and issue money and credit direct the policies of government, and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people."

RT. HON. REGINALD McKENNA.

20 representatives of 128 nations create money, which is all powerful on government policies and destinies of the peoples of those governments. Representatives of 128 nations joined in one organization, to create a belief in monetized debt, to fool and exploit all the people of the world. No one nation could act independently without breaking the conspiratorial agreements that keep the world's people fooled.

Make-believe "money" can only be used when it is created in one human mind and accepted in all others. If any group of people or nations stopped believing in the monetized debt "money", its power to support belief in a false world, would be replaced by truth, proportionately.

* * * * * * * *

106

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 24, May 16,1978

The whole world is in the grip of this monetized debt, (modern money madness) and are believing that the world as they 'see' it is the real world. People 'see' the military-industrial complex as the instigators of wars for the monetary profit. The military-industrial complex is owned, lock, stock, and barrel by the creators and issuers of monetized debt.

WHY SHOULD ANY GROUP DO ANYTHING TO EARN WHAT THEY CAN CREATE, BY THE BILLIONS, AT NO COST?

WARS ARE DESIGNED, STAGED, DIRECTED AND CONCLUDED EXACTLY AS PLANNED BY THE BANKERS, BUT NOT FOR THE REASON ACCEPTED BY THE PEOPLE.

For instance, the people 'see' the F.D.A and the A.M.A. as being against the Vitamin B17 Laetrile because chemotherapy for cancer is so profitable. The people see the petroleum industry supplying huge sums of money for cancer research and lobbying to suppress Laetrile. The profit potential would be huge for any synthetic drug to cure cancer derived from petroleum. The largest petroleum industry complexes are owned lock, stock, and barrel by the creators and issuers of monetized debt.

WHY SHOULD ANY GROUP DO ANYTHING TO EARN WHAT THEY CAN CREATE, BY THE BILLIONS, AT NO COST?

THE MONEY IS SUPPLIED, AND THE LOBBYING IS CARRIED OUT, THE F.D.A. IS AGAINST LAETRILE, THE A.M.A. IS AGAINST LAETRILE, BUT NOT FOR THE REASON ACCEPTED BY THE PEOPLE.

The real reason wars are started and Laetrile is suppressed by the bankers is: TRUTH STRANGER THAN FICTION,

"If fewer people were bidding against each other -- if our demand were kept in balance with the supply of merchandise -- then prices would not go up, and our money would keep its value.''

KEEPING OUR MONEY HEALTHY
New York Federal Reserve Publication p. 12.

Population increases occurring during the time that monetized debt is generally accepted have a tendency to expose the monetized debt as the embezzler of wealth that it actually is. Wars kill off the young, prime, procreative - potential, of any nation, lowering its population growth.

* * * * * * * *

107

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

page 25, May 16,1978

The longer a cure for cancer can be delayed by looking in the wrong direction, the more people wilt die; lowering the population. At the present time, the success of the efforts being made are manifest in the United States' zero population growth.

Ask yourself: how long do you have to travel in the wrong direction to get where you wish to go? Ask yourself: what kills people more efficiently and in greater numbers faster than war?

The excuse accepted by the people for concern about population growth is that we will run out of food. How does that stack-up against the farmers being paid not to grow crops. Yet, the people believe this nonsense. Laetrile is suppressed; "It doesn't do any good" or any harm. Liquor and Cigarettes are permitted with just a printed warning. Ask yourself: Why? Because Liquor and Cigarettes help to kill-off people and lower the population, but Laetrile MAY HAVE the OPPOSITE effect.

IF THE PEOPLE EVER SEE THE TRUTH, IT WOULD RESULT IN A CHOATIC SITUATION FOR WHICH THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A PRECEDENT.

"I am reluctant to engage in public discussion of something in which people are gambling with such high stakes."

GEORGE P. SCHULTZ - WALL STREET JOURNAL
WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 7, 1973 p. 3.

"The high minded man is more interested in the truth than in what people believe."

ARISTOTLE

The only solution to the problems of the world is truth. Truth accepted by the people on the world will render monetized debt inoperative and eliminate its power to direct the people as performers in a false world scenario. Only when the people know the truth will they be able to eliminate the power that subverts it.

"The great free nations of the world must take control of our monetary problems if these problems are not to take control of us."

JOHN F. KENNEDY, JUNE OF 1963, "A THOUSAND DAYS," p. 655.

"At stake is nothing less than the foundation for the freedom and security of this generation and those that follow."

JOHN CONNALLY -- WALL STREET JOURNAL NOVEMBER 14, 1971.

* * * * * * * *

108

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 26, May 16,1978

I have to believe that I am correct in my conclusions concerning the state of this nation, when I can quote such great U.S. Patriots and prominent citizens of the world as the following;

U.S. President George Washington, Bank President Mr. Darryl R. Francis, Economist Mr. Wassily Leontieff, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board Mr, Arthur F. Burns. French economist Mr. Jacques Rueff, U.S, Presidents James Madison, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Mr. Daniel Webster, Credit Suisse official Dr. Heinz R. Wuffli, Constitutional Jurists, Marshall, Webster, Story, Curtis, Nelson, Mr. Benjamin Disraeli, Mr. William Jennings Bryan, Mr. John Connally, Mr. Robert V· Roosa, Rt. Hon. Reginald McKenna, Mr. George P. Shultz, ARISTOTLE, and Ü.S. President John F. Kennedy.

All of the above gentlemen were concerned with truth and integrity. Some of them may have been involved in the unbelievable scheme to ruin this nation, but their involvement may also have been the result of being duped. Ignorance is no excuse, but I have always looked at ignorance as being willfully disregarded knowledge. For anyone to willfully disregard a truth they must first be exposed to it. It is my sincere purpose to expose these truths in this correspondence and determine the exact, proper, lawful course to follow.

None of the above men would ever have condoned the devious, deceitful, disgraceful, degrading crimes of issuing legal counterfeit, practicing Ponsi game pyramiding, Robin Hoodery, Bribery, Extortion, and legal mugging, under the guise of GOOD government, if they were AWARE of such conditions.

I am totally unable to determine the exact lawful justification for "income tax" and I sincerely feel that I have committed an error in having been involved in that extortion. Extensive investigation discloses that for me to have been involved I must have been subliminally seduced into violating my U.S. Constitutionally guaranteed rights. I am repeating my request that all unlawful, as opposed to illegal, "income taxes" collected from me be returned within a reasonable elapsed time.

Sincerely,

Merrill Ì. Å. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to various personal friends and interested officials.

* * * * * * * *

109

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

110

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

May 30, 1978

Richard C. Voskuil
District Director
Internal Revenue Service
1124 Market Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63101

Additional grounds in support of request for refund:
Refer to correspondence of:
April 21, 1978
May 5, 1978
May 16, 1978

Dear Sir:

In previous correspondence I stated that to eat and clothe myself, using the Fed. "Notes", I am forced to commit FRAUD upon my unaware neighbors. To aid you and the Internal Revenue Service in understanding how the non-bank public can remain mostly unaware of the FRAUD, I offer the following documentation.

M1 is defined as Demand Deposits PLUS currency in the hands of the public. In just this simple definition there lies hidden to the unwary eye an embodiment of FRAUD that is MONSTROUS. It is unbelievable to begin with that there are EIGHT different DEFINITIONS for money.

"The Federal Reserve quite rightly stresses that the workings of monetary policy are still imperfectly understood. In an apparent effort to underline the confusion, Fed. officials have recently been talking of eight versions of the money supply."

W.S.J., February 24, 1975, p. 10

Just this first one (M1) is a case in point for unbelievability. Demand deposits are NUMBERS IN A LEDGER.

"Deposits are merely book entries . . . demand deposits are liabilities of commercial banks. The banks stand ready to convert such deposits into currency or transfer their ownership at the request of depositors."

Modern Money Mechanics, , Chicago Federal Reserve Publication, p. 3.

The significant phrase in the above quote is: "CONVERT SUCH DEPOSITS INTO CURRENCY."

IN THE U.S. TODAY MOST OF THE NON-BANK PUBLIC ACCEPTS THE FED. NOTES (DOLLAR BILLS) AS THE CURRENCY OF THE UNITED STATES!

"Demand deposits are liabilities of commercial banks." (above)

HOW DO YOU CONVERT A LIABILITY INTO A PIECE OF PAPER?

" . . . liabilities are obligations to deliver . . . "

St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank Review, Feb. 75, p. 19

HOW DO YOU CONVERT AN OBLIGATION TO DELIVER INTO A PIECE OF PAPER?

* * * * * * * *

111

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 2, May 30, 1978

It would seem that you could use a piece of paper to be an invoice or a note. A piece of paper as an invoice or note would be physical evidence of the obligation to deliver or liability, but not the liability per se. Liability and obligation are abstract terms applied to an INTANGIBLE. Currency is an abstract term applied to a TANGIBLE medium of exchange.

It would seem, by the statement: "The banks stand ready to convert such deposits into currency . . . " that the INTANGIBLE number entries can somehow be made into TANGIBLE currency by the banks. It could also mean that somehow the banks are able to make an INTANGIBLE usable as currency (medium of exchange) without it having to be a TANGIBLE. This means that the non-bank public is made to accept an INTANGIBLE, THAT DOES NOT EXIST, as a medium of exchange that cannot be perceived by any of the five human senses.

"Money is such a routine part of everyday living that its existence and acceptance are ordinarily taken for granted. A user may sense that money must come into being either automatically as a result of economic activity or as an outgrowth of some government operation, But just HOW this happens all too often remains a mystery."

Modern Money Mechanics, Chicago Federal Reserve Publication p2.

This apparent impossibility has been accomplished by utilizing the non-redeemability technique. If the intangible were represented by a tangible and the non-bank public accepted the tangible as the non-redeemable 'currency' then the intangible would become money by proxy.

BEING NON-REDEEMABLE THE FED. "NOTES" ("PAPER DOLLAR BILLS") WOULD NEVER BE UNMASKED AS TOKENS THAT REPRESENTED AN IMAGINARY MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE.

The units of demand deposits (number entries in books) are the MODERN money of account just as the gold and silver coin were our FORMER money of account recorded by the SAME number entries.

A silver certificate which could withdraw silver coin by its own surrender could not of itself BE the silver coin. Neither can a modern paper "note" which can convey "ownership" of demand deposits BE those demand deposits per se.

THE SILVER COIN WHICH COULD BE WITHDRAWN HAVE BEEN REPLACED WITH COPPER-NICKEL SLUGS!

"Coins do have some intrinsic value as metal, but far less than their face amount."

Modern Money Mechanics, , p. 3

* * * * * * * *

112

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 3, May 30, 1978

The "MODERN MONEY" number entries do not represent any equivalent amount of tangible currency to be withdrawn. The number entries record units of an imaginary medium of exchange which cannot be redeemed.

"Confidence in these forms of money also seems to be tied in some way to the fact that assets exist on the books of the, government and the banks equal to the amount of money outstanding, even though most of these assets themselves are no more than pieces of paper (such as customers' promissory notes), and it is well understood that money is not redeemable in them."

Modern Money Mechanics , p. 3.

The paper "currency" unit is not the demand deposit unit itself anymore than the HAT CHECK is the HAT. In the case of "MODERN MONEY" there isn't even a hat! The paper "currency" units are not "claim checks" on something that can be withdrawn, they are non-redeemable. The paper "currency" units are mere physical evidence of the right of their holder to have the demand deposit (liability), (obligation to deliver), (modern money unit), (number entry in a book), "ownership" SHIFTED to whomever shall again 'deposit' the paper "currency" unit.

The paper "currency" unit ("dollar bill") is no more than a PREPRINTED, NON-SELECTIVE, 'CHECK' which can "SPEND" the modern, demand deposit, money.

"Demand deposits are the modern counterpart of bank notes. It was a small step from printing notes to making book entries to the credit of borrowers which the borrowers, in turn, could "spend" by writing checks."

Modern Money Mechanics , p. 4,

Writing a check and "spending" it is the most direct way of transferring "ownership" of demand deposit, modern, imaginary, money, units from one account to another. "A"'s check is "spent" at "B"'s place of business. "B" deposits the check in "B"'s account at "B"'s bank. "B"'s bank credits "B"'s account with the amount of the check (number entry). "B"'s bank sends the check to the clearing house (Fed.). Fed. takes the amount of "A"'s check off "A"'s bank's account books and transfers it to "B"'s bank's account books. Fed. sends "A"'s check to "A"'s bank and "A"'s bank removes "A"'s check amount from "A"'s checking account and returns the 'canceled' check to "A".

* * * * * * * *

113

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 4, May 30, 1978

The number entries NEVER LEFT the banking system's books. The demand deposit, number entries, "existed", on the books, during that entire interval. No demand deposit, number entries were CONVERTED (transmuted or transformed) into currency and left the system to travel about in the hands of the public. However, there is one interesting and significant thing that does happen during the interval just described.

Between the exact time that "B"'s deposit is credited to "B"'s account at "B"'s bank and the exact time that "A"'s check amount is removed from "A"'s account at "A"'s bank -- BOTH "A"'s account and "B"'s account showed the same demand deposit, number entries as modern, "spendable" money. This double amount condition exists for the period of time it takes for "A"'s check to be physically transported from "B"'s bank to the Fed. (for clearing), and back to "A"'s bank to be finally canceled. This additional amount of demand deposit, modern, imaginary, money, units is known as the 'FLOAT'. This interval is sometimes several days with the Fed.'s function limited by law to 24 hours.

Knowledgeable people have been using the additional demand deposit, modern, imaginary, money, units "created'' as the 'FLOAT' to their advantage since the system was initiated.

It is imperative to note in one's mind that a gold or silver coin could not exist in two places at the same time. It is also imperative to note that anytime checks are used this exact same FLOAT is "created" no matter what the medium of exchange is.

The FLOAT comes into being with the adding of the check's amount to its depositor's account, and is ended with the subtraction of the check's amount from its writer's account. At no time was there any number subtraction from the WHOLE of the demand deposit, modern, imaginary, money, units on the books of the banking system. At no time were demand deposit, number entries CONVERTED into currency and REMOVED from the banking system.

In the case of "dollar bills," "A" writes a check and cashes it at his own bank for "dollar bills" (Fed. "Notes"), The Fed. "Notes" save "A" the trouble of writing a check, for each and every purchase, but their action is similar to that of a check. "A"'s check amount is subtracted from "A"'s account and shifted to "A"'s bank's own account. "A" now has physical tokens (paper dollar bills") that represent ANY demand deposit, modern, imaginary, money, units 'held' in ANY bank's account of THE BANKING SYSTEM! These number entries in the banking system's bank's accounts are the 'FLOAT' "created" by the issuance of the Fed. "Notes".

"The net monetary liabilities of the monetary authorities are held either as currency in the hands of the public or as commercial bank reserves and can be viewed as the "base" for the nation's money stock."

St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank Review, August 1972, p. 3.

* * * * * * * *

114

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 5, May 30, 1978

". . . .$1 of base held in the banking system as reserves may support more than $1 of demand deposits and therefore more than $1 of money."

St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank Review, August 1972, p. 4.

These 'FLOAT' amounts "exist" for as long as the "currency" is "in the hands of the public". BOTH amounts can be "spent". The banks can certainly "spend" what is in their accounts; the public can "spend" the physical tokens.

When "A" "spends" the physical tokens (Fed. "Notes"), ("Dollar Bills") in "B"'s store, "B" can use them directly or "B" can deposit them in "B"'s bank. If "B" deposits the physical tokens, "B"'s bank will shift numbers from its own account to "B"'s account and retire the tokens to the vault. That particular amount of the 'FLOAT' will be ended. Returning the tokens to the vault is tantamount to returning a canceled check to its writer.

TAKING IN TOKENS AND CANCELLING THE FLOAT THEIR ISSUANCE "CREATED" IS NOT IN ANY WAY SIMILAR TO REDEEMING SILVER CERTIFICATES WITH SILVER COIN. WHEN THE MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE IS REAL, ISSUING SILVER CERTIFICATES "CREATES" FLOAT, BUT ONLY ONE OF THE TWO AMOUNTS IS IMAGINARY -- 'THE FLOAT'. WHEN A SILVER CERTIFICATE IS REDEEMED, THE FLOAT IS REMOVED AND THE SILVER IS ISSUED; THE BOOKS ARE CLEAN.

WHEN THE FED. "NOTES" ARE RETIRED TO THE VAULT THE FLOAT IS REMOVED, BUT THE ORIGINAL DEMAND DEPOSIT, IMAGINARY, MONEY UNITS REMAIN; THE BOOKS ARE NOT CLEAN.

In the case of using checks, the float is not created with its issuance. The float only lasts from the check's DEPOSIT to its CANCELLING. The entire interval that a check may be used by successive endorsers and 'PASSED AS CASH' there ISN'T ANY FLOAT. The float only begins when the check is deposited and ends when the check is canceled.

In the case of using Fed. "Notes" ("dollar bills") the float is created with their issuance and remains until their deposit at the same bank or any other bank in the system.

* * * * * * * *

115

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 6, May 30, 1978

M1 defined as demand deposits plus currency in the hands of the public is not a true statement. Demand deposits remain in the banking system. Fed. "Note" "currency" represents the right to transfer the "ownership" of demand deposits and nothing more. What M1 really does is isolate from the TOTAL demand deposits that amount that is transferable by the non-bank public, or more specifically' -- the 'FLOAT'.

The Fed. is primarily concerned with limiting the amount of "money" the non-bank public "has" to "spend". M1 is that designated volume. The preeminent concern with the "spending" power of the non-bank public is necessary if the monetary authority is to control this nation's economy. The documentation for this can be found in the following quotes:

"One Federal Reserve official, . . . refers to a vague concept of the public's total demand for money or means of payment, and indicates that the function of the central bank is to limit the public's ability to hold as much money as it wants."

St. Louis Post Dispatch , Sunday, July 20, 1975, p. 6B

". . . the person who earns the money has also earned the right to spend a reasonable proportion of it in his or her own way."

TRENDS, 1st Nat'l Bank of St. LOUIS pub., Dec. 1, 1972.

"The money stock can be measured in several different ways. Most commonly, it is measured as M1 (demand deposits plus currency in the hands of the public)·"

St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank Review, August 1972, p. 2.

"Public" is any person or institution other than a monetary authority or a commercial bank. This . . . means that currency held by commercial banks, the U.S. Treasury, or Federal Reserve Banks, and demand deposits owned by the U.S. Treasury (Government deposits) or commercial banks (interbank deposits) are excluded from the money stock."

St. Louis Fed. Review, August 1972, p. 2.

Defining the money stock as "can be measured" -- M1 -- is really a means of misdirecting the minds of the non-bank public into believing that they can withdraw modern "money" from the banking system when in fact they cannot.

* * * * * * * *

116

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 7, May 30, 1978

The non-bank public is led to believe the "currency" (pieces of paper) is part of the "money stock" when in fact it is not. Demand deposits, number entries are the modern "money" and it cannot be withdrawn. Only the record of "ownership" can be shifted about, by checks (a short-time float "creator") or by "currency" (paper "dollar bills"), (a long-time float "creator").

The non-bank public's wealth exchange is influenced by and expropriated with the demand deposits created by the commercial banks.

"The public's most immediate sources of money are commercial banks."

St. Louis Fed. Review, August 1972, p. 2.

JUST THINK ABOUT THE STORY OF "ALADDIN'S LAMP" AS YOU PONDER THE FOLLOWING QUOTE:

"The total amount of base outstanding at any time is principally determined by the . . . amount of U.S. Government securities owned by the Federal Reserve System. Whenever the Federal Reserve buys securities on the open market for its own account, the monetary base increases."

St. Louis Fed. Review, August 1972, p. 4.

THE MORE THEY "SPEND" THE MORE THEY HAVE!

These are private institutions - COMMERCIAL BANKS - which "create" money and buy U.S. Treasury securities. The more they buy the more money they have with which to buy.

HOW CAN THE NON-BANK PUBLIC EVER HOPE TO COMPETE WITH THAT AWESONE POWER?

The non-bank public is kept unaware of the true nature of modern money by the very deceitful nature of the monetary concepts that are presented to them.

The paper "dollar bills" (Fed. "Notes") are accepted, in good faith, by the non-bank public. The paper "dollar bills" look like the old gold and silver certificates, but are COUNTERFEIT IN EVERY RESPECT:

They cannot redeem gold or silver specie or transfer ownership of ANY tangible commodity. They can only be "used" to direct the banking system to shift about the "ownership" of intangible number entries in books called demand deposits.

* * * * * * * *

117

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 8, May 30, 1978

Demand deposits (the modern U.S. "money" of account) are "created" by the commercial banks and are completely captured within the banking system. Demand deposits are used to expropriate and redistribute the wealth of the non-bank public. Demand deposits are used to elect the officials of and direct the policies of the non-bank public's government.

"Those who create and issue money and credit direct the policies of government, and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people."

The Right Honorable Sir. Reginald McKenna
former President of the Midland Bank of England
ex-secretary of the British Exchequer. 1920.

Somehow, with all the pride I can muster being a citizen of the United States of America, I cannot be proud of this unmeasurable HOAX upon the non-bank public. This has got to be the greatest HOAX ever perpetrated on the Planet Earth. To think that the Internal Revenue Service is a large functioning part of this fantastic scheme is unbelievable. I can no longer contain my fear of this knowledge. I have to the best of my ability seen to it that no matter what happens to me, this knowledge will be preserved and passed on .

I myself do not want to be one of those that knowingly participated in its perpetuation. I respectfully request that you refund all the "income tax" withheld and accepted from me since June, 1968. If the Internal Revenue Service is still fooling itself into believing this HOAX will not be found out, please tell me on what grounds it bases that belief. Tell me how the I.R.S. hopes to escape:

"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any citizen in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or the laws of the United States . . . They shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results, they shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life."

U.S.C., Title 18, sec 241.

I personally do not wish the wrath of law brought down upon my head. This record will stand as my witness that I have declared myself on the side of law and justice to the best of my ability. Being able to determine what law and justice is, by the U.S. Constitution, and double checking 'that' against who gets convicted, for what, seems to be very confusing.

118

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 9, May 30, 1978

There isn't any doubt that counterfeit, printed by a counterfeiter, robs the public at large. Counterfeit notes haven't any intrinsic value, do not represent ownership of anything tangible on deposit, are not redeemable from their issuers, and are accepted only because the public mistakenly believes they have value.

Federal Reserve "Notes" - counterfeit by authority, on the other hand, haven't any intrinsic value, do not represent ownership of anything tangible on deposit, are not redeemable from their issuers, and are accepted only because the non-authority public mistakenly believes they have value.

The DIFFERENCE is that counterfeit, counterfeit notes, enter into exchange interest free, whereas Federal Reserve "Notes" -- Authorities' counterfeit, enters into exchange representing units of license to steal (commercial bank liabilities), issued with an interest burden which adds to the cost of every product and service.

Clearly, of the counterfeit available to us, counterfeit by the non-authorized counterfeiters does less robbing than Federal Reserve "Notes"; but the counterfeit counterfeiters get convicted, and the monetary authorities are permitted to continue their counterfeiting.

When does stealing by an authority become crime? IS stealing by an authority called by a more respectable term "HIDDEN TAXATION"? But administrative authority does not have the right to tax. The right to tax was given to Congress. Does an act itself determine a crime, or is it the presence or lack of "EVIL INTENT"? What determines the degree of guilt? Is extortion 'NOT extortion' if it is carried out by nice friendly gentlemen?

Is it possible to be guilty of conspiracy if you are unaware of the true function you perform? Is the I.R.S. 'NOT guilty' by virtue of: "Congress told them to do it?" Is the I.R.S. 'NOT guilty' by virtue of: "They were just following orders?" Do we need another Nuremberg trials to resolve this "Income Tax" question?

What about all the innocent victims who have been convicted of Willful Failure to Comply? They were brought to trial by an I.R.S. that was penalizing its victims of extortion for Willful Resistance to Extortion. No one in their right mind can determine a tax liability on an accumulated amount of authorized extortion. We have authorized money creation. Authorized Muggings, authorized Pigeon Drop, etc., etc..

HOW CAN THESE THINGS BE? WHAT IS TO BE THE OUTCOME? IS THE "INCOME TAX" THE ONLY IMPOSSIBLE CONSEQUENCE OF THIS MONETARY MADNESS?

119

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 10, May 30, 1978

With debts as assets called money, how does anyone attempt to keep books? With debt on one side of the account called 'debt', and debt on the other side of the account caned 'asset', how do you differentiate as to which debt is 'debt' and which debt is an 'asset'?

One side is 'accounts receivable' RECEIVED, and the other side is 'accounts receivable' ISSUED where does accounts payable go? It seems you cannot have an accounts payable because there is no longer ANY means of payment. Bookkeeping no longer determines net worth, but instead determines NET DEBT, and that has to be deferred. How does anyone determine tax due on NET DEFERRED DEBT? Net deferred debt cannot be used to redeem gold and silver specie from the Fed. It is not FRIVOLOUS to be concerned about non-redemption. It is the essence of conscientiousness to be concerned about where this monetized debt - MONETARY MADNESS - is leading the non-bank public of the world.

"A large and growing number of analysts, on the other hand, now regard the National Debt as something useful, if not an actual blessing."

THE NATIONAL DEBT, - Fed. Res. Bank. of Philadelphia Publication, p. 2.

Since debt cannot be paid, why not say: "Well! We don't think debt should be paid anyway." Then it is only a small step to where you can say: "Well! In reality debt is a blessing!" It isn't any greater madness to think and to say those things when you are totally unable to justify the monetized-debt-madness to begin with.

"Many modern economists believe . . . the National Debt need not be reduced at all. . . . Debt has a deceptive, something-for-nothing kind of charm . . . spending tomorrow's income for today's goods and services is a legitimate and valuable practice."

THE NATIONAL DEBT, - Fed. Res. Bank of Philadelphia Pub., p. 11

"Debt -- public and private -- is here to stay. It plays an essential role in economic processes, . . . What is required is not the abolition of debt, but its prudent use and intelligent management."

TWO FACES OF DEBT - Fed. Res. Bank of Chicago Pub., p. 33

If there is no intention to settle debt, won't it increase until the point where lenders have to ask to be repaid and a possible United States bankruptcy results?

* * * * * * * *

120

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 11, May 30, 1978

"Bankruptcy, in simplest terms, occurs when lenders demand repayment and the borrower can't make it. What are the chances that a significant proportion of the leaders of the National Debt will demand repayment ?" "Very slight."

THE NATIONAL DEBT, - Fed. Res. Bank of Philadelphia Pub., p. 8

The whole structure of monetized debt as money - or debts-as-assets rests - on the holders of the evidence of debt (the lenders) never demanding repayment. Only if debt is ACCEPTED as PERPETUAL can it continue into the future. Does that mean that if the non-bank public asked to be repaid, the United States would suffer BANKRUPTCY?

"Nevertheless, let's suppose a great number of lenders (holders of Government securities) decided to demand repayment all at once. Could the borrower make it? The Federal Government, with the cooperation of the Federal Reserve, has the inherent power to create money - almost any amount of it. This power makes technical bankruptcy out of the question."

THE NATIONAL DEBT, - Fed. Res. Bank of Philadelphia Pub., p. 9

WE CANNOT GO BANKRUPT!

DEBT IS NOW PERPETUAL!

ALMOST ANY AMOUNT OF 'DEBT MONEY' CAN BE CREATED!

IF THE LENDERS DEMANDED REPAYMENT THEY WOULD GET MORE DEBT!

BANKRUPTCY IS ELIMINATED BY INCREASING DEBT!

HAS A NEW PRINCIPLE BEEN DISCOVERED?

DEBT CAN NOW SETTLE DEBT! BY DECREE!

BANKRUPTCY HAS BEEN ERADICATED FROM THE BOOKS OF NATURAL LAW!

"THIS POWER MAKES TECHNICAL BANKRUPTCY OUT OF THE QUESTION."

"Yet this power also makes it possible for governments to pursue policies that could have even more disastrous results than bankruptcy."

THE NATIONAL DEBT, p. 9

* * * * * * * *

121

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 12, May 30, 1978

MORE DISASTROUS RESULTS THAN BANKRUPTCY? THIS POWER MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO PURSUE POLICIES THAT COULD HAVE MORE DISASTROUS RESULTS? AN ENTIRE NATION - OUR NATION - COLLAPSING INTO BANKRUPTCY CAN BE PREVENTED BY A POWER THAT CAN CREATE RESULTS MORE DISASTROUS THAN BANKRUPTCY?

YES! THE POWER TO CREATE MONEY CAN RESULT IN A CONDITION MORE DISASTROUS THAN BANKRUPTCY! 'MONETARY COLLAPSE'! A COLLAPSE OF ALL CONFIDENCE IN MONEY. A NEW DARK AGES!

"The belief is widespread that the current monetary crisis marks the end of an epoch. It is open to question whether this should be interpreted as the end of the post-war period or whether - and this appears more probable - the loss of confidence in the stability of currencies heralds a historical change . . . ."

THE MONETARY CRISIS in the LIGHT of CONTEMPORARY HISTORY
Credit Suisse Pub., Vol. 31., p. 3

EPOCH:

1. Any event or time of an event marking the beginning of a relatively new development; 2. a period In time characterized by a distinctive development.

A loss of CONFIDENCE in money so DISASTROUS as to affect the whole concept and acceptance of money since it began. What could happen that could shake-up a world so badly its public would lose all confidence in money? What thing MORE DISASTROUS than a Nation - Our Nation - going bankrupt?

"It has happened in other countries. Governments have created too much money and accelerated inflation to runaway proportions. Soaring prices then reduced the value of interest-bearing securities to next to nothing. Many lenders and investors were severely hurt or completely ruined."

THE NATIONAL DEBT, p. 9

* * * * * * * *

122

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 13, May 30, 1978

Runaway inflation, soaring prices, interest-bearing securities to zero, lenders and investors completely ruined. Loss of value due to bankruptcy could hurt and ruin all those invested with the entity going bankrupt - whether it be a company, a nation, or the world; but a loss of ALL CONFIDENCE in the money ITSELF is TANTAMOUNT to TOTAL COLLAPSE of ALL CURRENT MEANS of DETERMINING EXCHANGE PARITIES.

The public has used MONETARY EXCHANGE PARITIES as the very base for the distribution of wealth. MORE DISASTROUS than bankruptcy, MORE DISASTROUS than TOTAL LOSS of CONFIDENCE IN MONEY is THE LOSS OF THE FACILITY of money. The use of "money" which was originally BARTER, LIFTED THE WORLD OUT OF BARBARISM INTO CIVILIZATION. The LOSS of the FACILITY of money can collapse our modern world into the ABYSS OF A NEW DARK AGES.

"Let us face It: there is no international monetary order - all we have is disorder, sometimes chaotic disorder."

F. W. Shulthess, Chairman of the Board
Swiss Credit Bank Zurich.

RECYCLING PETRO DOLLARS, Pub. #29, p. 3.

". . . there is a very real danger of intensified trade protectionism, which could precipitate a desintegration of the world economy. . . ."

Pub, #29, p. 6

Could this POWER, that can make BANKRUPTCY OUT OF THE QUESTION and bring about this new DARK AGES, PERHAPS, prevent the inevitable collapse the same way it ABOLISHED the natural law of bankruptcy?

"No parliament in the world will ever be powerful enough to override market forces for any length of time. This basic truth is unfortunately often forgotten, especially when election pledges have to be redeemed."

THE MONETARY CRISIS, Vol. 31, pp. 13-14

"If they are not solved in good time, the price that will have to be paid for monetary disorder will be too high for Switzerland and for the Europe in which we live."

THE MONETARY CRISIS , Vol. 31, p. 27

* * * * * * * *

123

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 14, May 30, 1978

The price will be " . . . TOO HIGH . . . " for Switzerland and Europe. But what about the price the United States is already paying in part.

"The worldwide supply of dollars has become a flood."

THE MONETARY CRISIS, Vol. 31, p. 23

"THE WORLDWIDE SUPPLY OF DOLLARS HAS BECOME A FLOOD."

The Arabs have multi-billions, Europe has multi-hundred-billions and all imaginary and as worthless as checks drawn on 'INSUFFICIENT FUNDS'. What should they do with "bad checks" written by an entity on the verge of something more disastrous than bankruptcy. They are "buying" anything they can get with them, to get rid of them, before the total loss of confidence reduces their exchange value to zero. They are "buying" land, buildings, businesses, banks, anything before the collapse. Anything but things that they produce at home. Importing too much of the things that they produce would ruin their nation's economy prematurely.

"The attitude of the average U.S. citizen is quite different, since in view of the relatively minor importance of external trade for his country, he is not impressed by overseas opinion concerning the U.S. currency."

MONETARY CRISIS, Vol.31, p.11.

We are being OUTBID, for our own goods, with our own "money', by foreigners. Like Argentina that produces beef but cannot afford to eat beef, that is the fate we are inheriting. A heritage born out of the "INHERENT" power of the Federal Reserve to create money. This power must be ended. No one should have the right to create an order upon the production of others. What must be done now is more imperative than it was when the CONTINENTAL DOLLAR was ended.

A PRACTICAL SOLUTION:

The Legal Tender Acts must be REVERSED: The holders of Fed. "Notes" and claims to demand deposits must be able to use them to bid for the titles to wealth acquired by the original issuers of the Fed. "Notes", at the time of their issuance. From that same point in time any bank should be permitted to issue 100% redeemable currency upon 100% deposits of tangible commodity, just as it now issues cashier's checks. There should be strict laws against counterfeiting. Certificates of deposit should be issued, specifying the units and purity of the wealth on deposit, and available at any time for redemption by the certificated holder. No individual should write a check without having made a deposit to cover it. No warehouse should be permitted to issue certificates for material not in storage. No bank should be permitted to issue one unit more of certificates than it has deposits to cover.

* * * * * * * *

124

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 15, May 30, 1978

Interbank currency clearings would function exactly as check clearing does now. The uniform wealth coinage, fabricated by Government, exactly as in the Free Coinage of the past, would permit coin deposited at one bank to redeem the currency of another bank. A minimum of actual shipping of coin would be required occasionally to settle the balance of accounts.

JUSTIFICATION:

VALUE IS A HUMAN CONCEPTION - SUBJECTIVE.

PARITY IS THE VALUE OF ONE THING EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF ANOTHER·

Since all humans create their own sense of values -- nothing has a fixed value or a constant parity. Currency redeemable in gold coin would represent that gold coin by proxy, and have the parity of the gold (weight and purity) in the coin it represented. Currency exchange value in relation to any commodity or service would be exactly that of the wealth it can redeem. No one should attempt to fix the parity of any currency in relation to any other currency or commodity, domestic or foreign. Natural law regulates parities in a free market.

Parity changes inspire increases or decreases in production of various commodities and offerings of services. This natural law-regulation assures adequate volume of all goods and services except when shortages develop due to NATURAL causes. Adherence to the natural laws of a free market would permit complete compatibility to multi-metal 100% redeemable currency systems.

A free market is one in which the public is able to exchange production or services by competitive bidding, open to all, in the absence of any Government restriction and subject only to its own self-imposed restrictions.

In a free market all commodities must be free to seek their own parities in relation to all other commodities -- without exception--or the market is not free.

A free market is only possible with FREE COINAGE, and Government minting is limited to control over weight and purity of the precious metal they coin. The quantity of coin produced is limited to the amount of precious metal submitted by the public for coining, thereby assuring adequate volume at all times. Natural Law would again be the determining factor.

The entire world economy is using currencies representing monetized debt as the money. Any attempt to shut-off this "money", before the introduction of sound currency to take its place, would spell instant world wide monetary collapse.

* * * * * * * *

125

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 16, May 30, 1978

Here at home, the American public must have its U.S. Constitutionally guaranteed right of contract restored. The Legal Tender Acts must be reversed and the new sound currency introduced. Natural Law would then take-over and the old irredeemable currency would gradually but increasingly depreciate until it ceased to be used by anyone. The introduction of a new 100% redeemable currency put into use, would force out irredeemable currency by the discount that would explosively expand between the two currencies.

The Gresham's Law, so very often cited that: "Bad money drives out good" does not explain that it only occurs when the 'bad money' is made the 'Legal Tender'! Reverse the Legal Tender Acts as suggested above, introduce 100% redeemable, 100% reserve deposit currency ("good money") and it will drive out the 'bad money'!

AS SOON AS ALL THE FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTES" AND ALL "THIN AIR DEMAND DEPOSITS" ARE GONE LEGAL, TENDER ACTS SHOULD BE FINALLY ABOLISHED.

TENDER ACTS SHOULD NEVER AGAIN BE BROUGHT FORTH TO DARKEN THE PAGES OF HISTORY!

The secret of good government, peace and prosperity lies in WHO OWNS the Nation's accepted medium of exchange. When the public OWNS the currency and coin they use, then Government depends on the public's wealth for its survival, and the public directs the policies of Government. If ANY OTHER ENTITY owns the medium of exchange, AND THE PUBLIC IS FORCED TO USE IT, -- THAT ENTITY directs the policies of Government, and through Government, controls the people.

"It is the product of a prodigious collective error which will remain in history and will eventually be recognized as an object of astonishment and scandal."

Jacques Rueff, 1961

Our RIGHT OF CONTRACT was LOST when the words: "This note is legal tender for all debts public and private" REPLACED: "Pay to the bearer on demand" on our currency.

Our RIGHT OF CONTRACT and FREEDOM will return after we have returned to a 100% coin reserve for a 100% redeemable currency and all legal tender acts have been abolished.

"Legislation on the subject grew bitter; but finally, in June, 1781, all the Legal Tender Laws were repealed."

THE FINANCIAL HISTORY of the U.S. 1774-1789 by Albert Bolles.

* * * * * * * *

126

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 17, May 30, 1978

Specifically, I propose we do not permit our nation to be sacrificed on this "Treadmill to Financial Oblivion", but that we rescue it now by accepting the fact of bankruptcy. Consider the Fed. "Notes" held by their holders as valid claims upon the remaining wealth in the hands of the Fed. "Note" issuers. Audit that remaining wealth and auction it off bank by bank, holding company by holding company, allowing the holders of Fed. "Notes" to bid freely. Those who will accept less as 'SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM' will bid highest. Those who wish greater 'SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM' will bid lowest. This procedure would guarantee, to all holders, a greater return than If all Fed. "Notes" were allowed to become worthless. This procedure would be more equitable than a deflationary exchange that would rob all Fed. "Note" holders and allow the 'BANKRUPT' to retain title to all the loot gained by their issuance.

Immediately upon a successful bid, all Fed. "Notes" or demand deposits represented by check would be destroyed until the books were clear.

This proposed 'REVERSAL' of the Legal Tender Acts would guarantee the most honorable and most equitable bankruptcy proceeding under the conditions that exist. Bank presidents, as well as all employee holders of the monetized debt currency would be permitted to bid at the auctions. Only that wealth, STILL REMAINING, that was acquired by the creation and initial issuance of the monetized debt currency would be forfeit by the bankrupt.

That wealth which is NOT REMAINING has been lost forever and cannot be retrieved. No purpose would be served by retribution. All the irretrievable wealth lost to the non-bank public should be considered, by them, as their cost of education. Never again should the non-bank public allow themselves to become unaware of their responsibility to be constantly alert.

It should be realized that it took many generations (life-times) to develop and 'perfect' this HOAX. The exact purpose or intention of its founding bankers has been gradually obscured over time and is lost to us today. Whether it was altruistic or personal greed we cannot punish the ORIGINAL instigators, and it would be impossible to prove EVIL INTENT on the part of the present day perpetrators of the HOAX. Modern bankers are themselves victims of the HOAX as well. The entire world's population is to some degree a victim of this "money" HOAX. The implementation has been so gradual and subtle that very few will accept the existence of the HOAX even now. The bankers actually involved in the HOAX are not aware of the true significance of what they are doing.

"I doubt that monetization of debt has been a conscious act on the part of Government or on the part of the Federal Reserve System."

DARRYL R. FRANCIS, Former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

* * * * * * * *

127

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 18, May 30, 1978

"I am beginning now to wonder whether I fully grasped the significance of what we were doing, at the tine, and of the causes for the action we were initiating."

ROBERT V. ROOSA, former ASST. SECT. OF
THE UNITED STATES TREASURY, 1973.

Being unaware of the true significance of what they have been and are doing assures that it will be doubly difficult for them to accept the viability of the solution suggested here. Everyone accepts that if it had not been for the "thin air money" we would not have had the progress to date. That is a misconception easily dispelled.

EVERYTHING ACCOMPLISHED TO DATE IS THE RESULT OF THE EFFORTS OF MANKIND. TO SAY THAT MONETIZED DEBT MADE IT ALL POSSIBLE IS TO IGNORE THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF MONETIZED-DEBT-"MONEY".

Jenkins Law #52: MONEY EXPROPRIATES WEALTH.

" . . . inflation, even if correctly anticipated, reduces the wealth of money holders in proportion to their holdings of money."

FED. RES. BNK. St. Louis, REVIEW, Feb. 75, p. 19

Humans built the buildings, humans dug the canals, humans grew the food, humans built the ships, etc., etc.. All the "money" ever did is expropriate the title to wealth. Those who did the work very seldom ever became the 'OWNERS' of the results of their labor.

EVERYTHING THAT WAS ACCOMPLISHED DURING THE PERIODS OF INFLATION (MONETIZED DEBT) COULD HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED IF WEALTH HAD BEEN USED AS A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE INSTEAD OF "MONEY".

When gold and silver coin were the U.S. money of account in use it did not matter that they were called 'MONEY! Gold and silver is wealth, is produced by human exertion, is BARTER per se OR a medium of exchange determined by its use.

Loans were made with gold and silver coin. Projects were financed with gold and silver coin. All manner of 'SOUND BANKING' techniques were just as viable and facilitating "as any false medium", but a gold and silver 'SOUND' medium would have guaranteed that the general public who did the work would have owned the benefits derived therefrom.

* * * * * * * *

128

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 19, May 30, 1978

The problems and misery suffered by the non-bank public have never been DUE to the techniques of banking; that belief is a monstrous misconception. The fault has always been with the NATURE the medium of exchange.

"All the perplexities, confusions and distresses in America arise not from defects in the Constitution or confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, as much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation!"

JOHN ADAMS " . . . IGNORANCE OF THE N A T U R E . . . "

NATURE: 1. Essential character or constitution; distinguishing quality or qualities; essence; as the nature of steel or of love.

Every economic professor, Government advisor, Financial advisor, Economist, Austrian, Keynesian, Monetarist says Inflation is CAUSED by:

creating too much, how it is loaned, how much is loaned, what the charge for the loan is, who makes the loans etc., etc., etc . . . What drivel! Shame! Shame!

IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN, IT IS NOW, AND IT WILL FOREVER BE THE NATURE OF THE MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE THAT DETERMINES WHETHER OR NOT WEALTH IS EXPROPRIATED BY "MONEY"!

Inflation is not a CONDITION, it is a THING - inflation is an imaginary medium of exchange - "money" (monetized debt)! Inflation is a THING that cannot register on the five human senses. 'Money', that cannot register on the five human senses, is IMAGINARY "money" - "monetized debt" - 'inflation' per se.

THE NATURE OF ANY MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE THAT MAKES IT REGISTE ON THE HUMAN SENSES MAKES IT TANGIBLE.

THE NATURE OF ANY MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE THAT MAKES IT UNABLE TO REGISTER ON THE HUMAN SENSES MAKES IT INTANGIBLE.

* * * * * * * *

129

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 20, May 30, 1978

Surrendering Real for Unreal, Wealth for "Monetized Debt", Tangible for Intangible, in all cases is the expropriation of private property by the creators and issuers of the: Unreal, "monetized debt", intangible medium of exchange. It is not the AMOUNT that is created that does the expropriating - it is the N A T U R E of it being UNREAL, "MONETIZED DEBT" and INTANGIBLE that facilitates the expropriation. From the first unit to the last INFLATION is always 100% fraudulent acquisition of the producer's wealth by those who DO NOT produce 'ANY TANGIBLE THING'!

THIS INVISIBLE ROBBERY HAS BEEN GOING ON INTERMITTENTLY FOR THE LAST 200 YEARS OF UNITED STATES HISTORY.

THE TITLE TO WEALTH PASSING INTO THE HANDS OF THE CREATORS OF THE "MONEY" IS EQUAL TO THE EXACT AMOUNT OF "MONEY" CREATED - 100%.

10 units of "money" is 10 units of expropriation is 100% inflation. 1,000 units of "money" is 1,000 units of expropriation is 100% inflation. 1,000,000 units of "money" is 1,000,000 units of expropriation is 100% inflation.

Inflation is the THING - "monetized debt" - "money" - "imaginary medium of exchange" always 100% of the amount ISSUED whatever the 'ACTUAL COUNT' of units is.

If the medium of exchange was all produced goods or human labor performed, the total amount that could be exchanged would be 100% (all that there was). If any part of the medium of exchange was INTANGIBLE the total amount that could be exchanged would be 100% (all that had been issued).

The amount of INTANGIBLE or TANGIBLE mediums of exchange being BID for goods and services determines the parities of goods and services in relation to the mediums of exchange (usually referred to as "prices"). These parities are determined by the AMOUNT of medium of exchange BEING BID per unit of available goods or services, NOT by the total AMOUNT AVAILABLE TO BE BID.

The "existence" of the imaginary mediums of exchange allows the 'BIDDING UNIT QUANTITY' to EXCEED the 'PRODUCTION UNIT QUANTITY'. If that EXCESS is bid, the parity of goods and services will rise in relation to the medium of exchange.

THIS COULD NOT HAPPEN IF ALL MEDIA WERE REAL. IF ALL MEDIA WAS REAL, THE REAL MEDIA, WHICH WOULD BE ALL GOODS AND SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR EXCHANGE, COULD NOT EXCEED ITSELF (100%);

* * * * * * * *

130

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 21, May 30, 1970

WHEN real (tangible) mediums of exchange are removed and replaced by unreal (intangible) mediums of exchange, their NATURE of being IMAGINARY permits their QUANTITY to increase as a RATIO in RELATION to the amount of goods and services available for exchange; IMAGINATION CAN CONCEIVE FASTER THAN GOODS CAN BE PRODUCED OR SERVICES PERFORMED.

100 units of "money" is 100 units of expropriation is 100% inflation.
100 units produced-exchanged for100 units "money" is 100% expropriation = a "price" ratio (parity) of 1:1
1,000 units of "money" is1,000 units of expropriation is 100% inflation.
100 units produced-exchanged for1,000 units "money" is 100% expropriation = a "price" ratio (parity) of 1:10
1,000,000 units of "money" is1,000,000 units of expropriation is 100% inflation.
100 units produced-exchanged for1,000,000 units "money" is 100% expropriation = a "price" ratio (parity) of 1:10,000

The increase in the amount of "monetized debt" will increase the amount that CAN BE BID. The increased amount will generally result in MORE BID, but it is in NO WAY directly proportional. The effect of more being bid is an increase in "prices". Since monetized debt cannot settle debt the actual count of units of inflation must continually accelerate until "prices" explode upward. The N A T U R E of the intangible medium of exchange is the means of wealth expropriation which is always 100%.

THE QUANTITY OF THE INTANGIBLE MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE IS CONTINUALLY ACCELERATING. IT IS THIS EXCESS QUANTITY BEING BID PER UNIT OF GOODS AND SERVICES WHICH CAUSES "PRICE" ESCULATION. SINCE NO AMOUNT OF MONETIZED DEBT CAN BE ANY AMOUNT OF DEBT SETTLEMENT THE EXPROPRIATION OF WEALTH IS CONSTANT AT 100%.

THE EVER INCREASING "PRICE" ESCULATION IN NO WAY INCREASES THE PERCENTAGE OF EXPROPRIATION, BUT THE INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF "MONEY" INCREASES THE AMOUNT OF EXPROPRIATION.

EXPROPRIATION OF WEALTH BY "MONEY" IS CONSTANT AT 100%. THE AMOUNT OF "MONEY" "CREATED" IS EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT EXPROPRIAED (100%).

INCREASES IN "MONEY" ALLOW INCREASES IN BIDDING FOR GOODS AND SERVICES WHICH RAISES "PRICES" (PARITIES).

"PRICES" RISING EXPOSE THE EXPROPRIATION BUT DO NOT EFFECT THE RATE OF INFLATION WHICH IS CONSTANT AT 100%.

* * * * * * * *

131

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 22, May 30, 1978

What makes the truth appear strange and confusing is the fact that no one ever works for the "money" per se, but works for what they intend to exchange the "money" for. As pointed out on Page 9 of my correspondence of May 5, 1978 all exchanges are really exchanges of the result of one individual's human exertion for the result of another individual's human exertion. Swapping the results of human exertion for the results of another's human exertion even though "money" may be used as a medium of exchange does not alter the fact it is EVENTUALLY indirect barter.

See: Question & Answer #3, pages 17-18 or correspondence, May 5, 1978.

The use of "monetized debt", represented by Fed. "Notes", as a medium of exchange, allows the "prices" rising to expose the "depreciation" of the Fed. "Notes" in their PRIMARY FUNCTION of expropriating wealth by fraud. The changes in "prices" (parities) expose the lowering parity of Fed.-"Note"-represented monetized debt units in relation to goods and services available.

THE FACT THAT ALL GOODS AND SERVICES EXCHANGED FOR FED. "NOTES" ARE 100% EXPROPRIATED BY THE N A T U R E OF THE "MONEY" ITSELF DOES NOT permit "PRICES" RISING to effect the RATE of inflation!

All that the non-bank public produces and exchanges for Fed. "Notes" is 100% expropriated by "inflation" (modern money), there isn't anything remaining to be affected in any way by "price" changes. "Price" changes are the parity ratios adjusting to the excess quantity of imaginary "money" units being bid 'as mediums of exchange'; money is not an end in itself. If "money" is "worth" less at the time of its use in bidding than when it was acquired it can appear that its depreciation was injustice, but it does not change the rate of inflation or expropriation which was accomplished with the "money's" issuance - 100%.

It is failing to consider the TIME FACTOR that causes the confusion. "Money", being intangible, expropriates by 100% whatever "it" is initially exchanged for at the TIME of issuance. After its initial primary function - that of expropriating wealth - has been accomplished with its issuance, its further use is simply as a "medium of exchange" and its depreciation as a medium of exchange can favor the debtor over the creditor, but cannot effect the original rate of expropriation which is a constant 100%.

IT IS EXTREMELY SAD THAT PRESENT DAY EMINENT ECONOMISTS COULD NOT FIGURE THAT OUT; PRESIDENT JOHN ADAMS DID!

* * * * * * * *

132

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 23, May 30, 1978

If the expropriation of wealth had not been acquiring the OWNERSHIP of everything FOR the ISSUERS of monetized debt, everything would still be there, but it would be OWNED by the PRODUCERS (the non-bank public).

"Money is the most important subject intellectual persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it is widely understood and its defects remedied very soon."

ROBERT H. HEMPHILL, Former Credit Manager, Fed. Res. Bank of Atlanta.

"Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money and control credit, and with a flick of a pen they will create enough to buy it back."

SIR JOSIAH STAMP (Former President, Bank of England).

"If, however, a government refrains from regulation and allows matters to take their own course . . . the worthlessness of the money becomes apparent, and the fraud upon the public can be concealed no longer."

JOHN MAYNARD KEYHES, "The Economic Consequences of Peace", (1920)

Jenkins Law #51:No one can discover and disclose a truth based upon a false premise.

INFLATION: 2. Disproportionate and relatively sharp and sudden increase in the quantity of money or credit, or both, relative to goods available for purchase. Inflation always produces a rise in the price level.

When the above definition was written there was a mixture of, part real (tangible) mediums of exchange (gold and silver coins), and part unreal (intangible) mediums of exchange (banker's credit). Since the real (tangible) gold and silver coins are 100% real and 0.0% false they are in no way part of any inflation. For the gold and silver coin 'specie' which was the thing called money to have been included in this definition was an error. Whereas from the first unit issued, to the last, all units of banker's credit are 100% inflation ". . . relative to goods available for purchase." The word inflation is a good definitive term for "monetized debt". "Monetized debt" IS "modern money", IS an imaginary medium of exchange, IS inflation, and IS always totally intangible " . . . relative to goods available for purchase," which is tangible!

* * * * * * * *

133

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 24, May 30, 1978

The premise that an INCREASE In the money quantity EXPROPRIATES the wealth of the citizens is false; that it can lead to higher "prices" is true.

The Jenkins premise that it is the N A T U R E of the 'money' that expropriates the wealth is true;

Jenkins Law #52:Money Expropriates Wealth!

"MONEY": Psychological entity accepted during an exchange in LIEU of a product or service.

ESTABLISHED:

Government sanctioned Pyramiding, Robin Hoodery, Pigeon drop, Bribery, Mugging, and Extortion is not desirable.

Law and Order without Justice is not desirable.

A United States Bankruptcy is not desirable.

A new Dark Ages is not desirable.

SOLUTION:

The N A T U R E of "money" is at the root of all our problems. There isn't any undesirable condition in our nation today that cannot be accurately and totally traced back to the root of an evil the power to create "money".

It is not WHO has the power to create "money" that is the root of evil. It is the power to create "money" at all! There is only ONE way to abolish the evil of "money" creation - ABOLISH "MONEY"!

MONEY is the abstract term for wealth mediums of exchange.

"MONEY" is the abstract term for the psychological entity that replaced the wealth mediums of exchange.

No person or agency, government or private, shall determine what anyone must accept as Lawful Tender;

"No State shall . . . make any . . . Law impairing the Obligations of Contracts."

U.S. CONSTITUTION

* * * * * * * *

134

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 25, May 30, 1978

The specifications, as outlined above, would cancel the injustices and corruptions being suffered daily in our nation, and true progress would be resumed.

Some Jenkins' Laws that facilitate Justice and economic stability are as follows:

1. Retaining unalienable rights to distribute one's own wealth is the only guarantee of freedom from tyranny.

5. A contract cannot protect anyone who lacks the wealth with which to force its fulfillment.

21. Where freedom reigns, those who do not produce food directly, have to produce wealth or perform service to exchange for it.

* * * * * * * *

135

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 26, May 30, 1978

24. Attempts to control and circumvent free market natural laws causes hidden free market transactions.

40. Parities are determined by exchanges developed by competitive bidding with respect to return on labor, variations in time, location and circumstance.

43. Government regulations of the use of capital inhibits free enterprise and causes economic decline.

48. Supply can never exceed demand because a quantity cannot exceed itself.

50. Controlled prices oppose competitive parities.

51. No one can discover and disclose a truth based upon a false premise.

52. "MONEY" expropriates wealth!

53. Objectivity is imperative because those unaware, are unaware, of being unaware!

54. Theory is debatable, truth is final!

55. Natural Law will not permit a debt to be settled with a debt!

59. No one can correct a fault of which he is unaware!

60. Victims of a HOAX are only victims for the duration of unaware-ness.

62. The wrong direction will not allow anyone to reach the desired destination.

63. False premises lead to false conclusions.

"The prime function of government is the protection of the different and unequal faculties of man for acquiring property."

JAMES MADISON.

"No other rights are safe where property is not safe."

DANIEL WEBSTER

* * * * * * * *

136

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 27, May 30, 1978

JUSTIFICATIONS:

I have established:

1. Fed. "Notes" are unLAWful!

2. Initial distribution constitutes FRAUD!

3. "Income tax" liability is VOID with Fed. "Notes" representing MONETIZED DEBT.

I have offered a solution:

1. Reverse Legal Tender Acts -- Introduce tangible media.

2. Abolish Legal Tender Acts.

I have requested return of all "dollar" quantities of monetized debt accepted or collected from me since June, 1968, plus a reasonable interest of your determination.

It would seem that I am asking for a refund because I desire to perpetuate fraud by their use. I have endeavored to justify my request in detail by stating my solution and an outline of its implementation. In that solution I state that all holders of Fed. "Notes" and claims upon demand deposits be permitted to bid them at auction for the loot remaining, in the hands of the Fed. "Note" issuers. It is my contention that until that time I will remain a fully qualified victim of this "money" HOAX and entitled to have all the evidence, of my being expropriated, returned to me. I am respectfully repeating my request for refund of all "income tax" withholdings and "payments" accepted from me since June, 1968, or a detailed, documented explanation of its denial.

There is a very deep concern about this matter and what lawful means may have to be employed to resolve it.

U.S. Constitutionally,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to various personal friends and interested officials.

* * * * * * * *

138

ADDRESS ANY REPLY TO:
Department of The Treasury
P. O. Box 1546 Central Station
St. Louis, Missouri 63188
District Director
Internal Revenue Service

DATE: JUN 27, 1978
IN REPLY REFER TO: DIR;STL;ID-5;GB:ao

Mr. Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr.
29 N. Meramec, Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

This is the final response to your letter of April 21, 1978, in which you requested a refund of all amounts of "income tax" withheld or accepted from you, since the introduction of "monetized debt."

Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars. These notes are denominated in dollars, which are the unit of account of United States money. The Coinage Act of 1972 established the dollar as the basic unit of United States currency, by providing that "the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, dimes or tenths, cents or hundredths," 31 USC, paragraph 371. The fact that Federal Reserve Notes may not be converted into gold or silver does " not render them worthless. The value of the dollar is its purchasing power.

Finally, I must inform you that there is no legal basis for an argument, that a taxpayer is entitled to a refund on the grounds that Federal Reserve Notes are non-redeemable or that the coinage is only reimbursable, for its 3% copper-nickel content. The courts have held that this contention is clearly frivolous. United States v Daly 481 F2d 28 (9th Cir) cert. denied 414 U. S. 1064 (1973).

I trust this information responds to your inquiry.

Sincerely yours,

John E. Burke, Acting District Director

* * * * * * * *

139

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

July 5,1978

Ref.: Your correspondence

John E. Burke
Acting District Director I.R.S. of
1124 Market Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63101

June 27,1978

Dear Mr. Burke:

Your one page correspondence of June 27, 1978 cannot be a response to my correspondence of April 21,1978, and its accompanying seventy four pages of additional grounds in support of request for refund. Unless your correspondence is limited to only the material dated April 21,1978, it cannot be a final response.

Your reference to my request for refund, which you acknowledge in the first sentence of your text as an inquiry in the last sentence of your written word, suggests, that perhaps, you did not get to see or read the full text of my request, or all the grounds in support of the request for refund.

Did you, Mr. John E. Burke - Acting District Director of I.R.S. - read the entire text of my correspondence April 21,1978 through May 30, 1978?

The first sentence of your second paragraph says: "Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars." This statement does not compare with the view of the Federal Reserve itself.

"In answer to your questions concerning Federal Reserve Notes, a Federal Reserve note is both a note and a dollar."

GRIFFITH L. GATWOOD, Deputy Secretary
of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, January 6,1978.

However, you say: "These notes are denominated in dollars, which are the unit of account of United States money. Do you mean "Federal-Reserve-Notes" or "dollars" are the unit of account? You follow that with a quote from Sec. 20. of the Coinage Act of 1792: "The money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, . . . " What " . . . money of account of the United States . . . " is it which " . . . shall be expressed in dollars . . . ."?? Since "dollar" will be the "expression" it cannot be the money! Since "dollar" cannot be the money are you saying that Federal Reserve Notes are ". . . the unit of account of United States money . . . ."??

Either you, yourself, are confused or there is apparent method visible here to create confusion. You say: "The fact that Federal Reserve Notes may not be converted into gold or silver does not render them worthless." ". . . them . . ." in that sentence refers, unmistakenly to: "Federal Reserve Notes."

* * * * * * * *

140

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 2, July 5, 1978

You follow that with: "The value of the dollar is its purchasing power." ". . . its . . ." in that sentence refers, unmistakenly to: "dollar." In these last two sentences of the second paragraph there is a complete reversal of the first sentence of the second paragraph.

In the first sentence you state: "Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars." The last two sentences refer to Federal Reserve Notes and dollars as one and the same. Either the first sentence or the last two are correct. Until you tell me which is correct I will not have been properly answered.

I am also deeply concerned about the phrase ". . . its purchasing power . . . ." What is purchasing power? I could understand the value of a dollar-quantity-of-gold or a dollar-quantity-of-silver, in coin form, being able to exchange for an equivalent value of any other commodity or a service. Dollar-quantities of gold or silver coin were excellent mediums of exchange and a "money" of account of the United States. Surely the token coinage (copper-nickel) of only 3% parity cannot be the "money" of account. What is the "money" of account of the United States that has 100% "purchasing power?" The copper-nickel token coinage represents 3% of the money of account of the United States; what represents the other 97%?

In your correspondence you say: "Finally, I must inform you that there is no legal basis for an argument that a taxpayer is entitled to a refund on the grounds that Federal Reserve Notes are non-redeemable or that the coinage is only reimbursable for its 3% copper-nickel content." My request was based on many more distinct grounds than only those two. I listed receipt of Federal Reserve Notes as receipts of dollars as "income" in error. I requested the refund on the basis of incorrectly filled-out returns. You have already confirmed this: "Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars." You have not established that I received any dollars. You have not established that the receipt of anything other than dollar-values constitute taxable "income."

". . . .there is no legal basis for argument . . .", but where is the lawful basis for denial of refund on returns filed in error. Apparently you feel that my request for refund can be denied arbitrarily. A 97% loss cannot be a dollar-value received. I did not receive the "income" I reported or that was reported by others as having been received by me.

I respectfully request that you reconsider my request for refund and either disburse the funds or give me a formal denial with precise citations.

Did you read the entire text of my request for refund?

Dollar units of - what - are the money of account of the United States'?

What - exactly - is meant by the term: "purchasing power?"

* * * * * * * *

141

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 3, July 5,1978

By what exact process does 97% seigniorage become "income" to those from whom it is taken?

What statute denies refunds to those who file returns in error?

I cannot consider this matter properly concluded without definite answers to the above questions. Someone must have the necessary authority to take responsibility for specific answers. I have tried very seriously to make myself understood to the highest authorities and have received only ambiguous and inexplicable answers. Incentive is rising by the minute to see this matter resolved.

Thank you in advance for whatever definitive answers you may be able to render. Double thanks if you see fit to disburse the funds for my refund.

Very truly yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to personal friends and interested officials.

* * * * * * * *

142

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

143

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

July 5,1978

Ref.: Correspondence from District Director denying refund.

Jerome Kurtz
Commissioner of I.R.S.
111 Constitution Ave.
Washington. D.C. 20224

Dear Commissioner:

A copy of the correspondence from the Acting District Director is enclosed for your convenience. Mr. John E. Burke points out that the Coinage Act of "1972" (this may or may not be an error) contains this direct quote "the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, dimes or tenths, cents or hundredths," then follows that quote, which I believe is from the Coinage Act of "1792", with "31 USC, paragraph 371." I believe ". . . 31 USC, paragraph 371 . . ." has been reaffirmed as late as "1972".

§ 371. DECIMAL SYSTEM ESTABLISHED

"The money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, dimes or tenths, cents or hundredths, and mills or thousandths, a dime being the tenth part of a dollar, a cent the hundredth part of a dollar, a mill the thousandth part of a dollar; and all accounts in the public offices and all proceedings in the courts shall be kept and had in conformity to this regulation"

". . . .the money of account of the united States shall be expressed in dollars . . . "

"Expressed. Means stated or declared in direct terms, set forth in words; not left to inference or implication. Anderson v. Board of Ed. of School Dist. No.91, 390 Ill. 412, 61 N.E. 2d 562-567

". . . .money of account . . . ." has not been established in the courts, probably because no one has had any real incentive. It was however, established in the Coinage Act of 1792 in no uncertain terms. The express terms of this Act have not been rescinded by Congress.

". . . money . . . "

"Sec. 11. And be it further enacted, That the proportional value of gold to silver in all coins which shall by law be current as money within the United States."

* * * * * * * *

144

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 2, July 5,1978

The gold and silver coins ". . . which shall by law be current as money . . . ." cannot be any more explicit; ". . . money within the United States . . . ." is gold and/or silver coin.

". . . of account . . . ."

"Sec. 16. And be it further enacted, That all the gold and silver coins which shall have been struck at, and issued from the said mint, shall be a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever."

". . . shall be a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever . . . ." does not leave any doubt that gold and/or silver coin was the " . . . money of account of the United States . . . ."

". . . shall be expressed in dollars . . . ."

". . . dollars . . . ."

"Dollar. The unit employed in the United States in calculating money values. It is of the value of one hundred cents. People v. Alba, 46 Cal. App.2d 859,117 P.2d 63.

Dollar is a measurement of the quantity of metal, by weight, in United States Coinage.

"Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, That there shall be . . . , coins of gold, silver, and copper, of the following denominations, values and descriptions, viz. Eagles - each - to be of the value of ten dollars or units, and to contain two hundred and forty-seven grains and four eighths of a grain of pure, . . . .gold . . . Dollar or Units - each to be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current, and to contain three-hundred and seventy-one grains and four-sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, . . . silver . . . Cents - each to be of the value of the, one hundredth part of a dollar, and to contain eleven pennyweights of copper . . . . "

COINAGE ACT 1792, NEVER RESCINDED.

* * * * * * * *

145

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 3, July 5,1978

Dollar is the unit quantity of metal, by weight, in United States coinage. Gold and silver coins are the lawful tender (money of account of the United States) and only by the weight of gold and silver contained in the coin.

"Sec. 16. And be it further enacted, That all the gold and silver coins which shall have been struck at, and issued from the said mint, shall be a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever, those of full weight according to the respective values herein before declared, and those of less than full weight at values proportional to their respective weights."

31 USC, paragraph 371 does not conflict with the specifics of the Coinage Act of 1792. It is strictly the decimal relationships of the coinage. The value of a "dollar" is contained in its gold or silver content as the unit quantity when it is of full weight.

"In its strict technical sense, "money" means coined metal, usually gold or silver, upon which the government stamp has been impressed to indicate its value." BLACK'S

". . . the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars . . . ." nothing could be more clear - "dollars" are not "money" - "money's" value is expressed in "dollars" - "dollar" is the expression of the value of "money" when the "money" is of full weight. "Dollar" therefore is not an entity which has value, but rather an expression of the value of "money." "Dollar," as a unit of value expression, does not have purchasing power! "Dollars" are not money. The statement: "The value of the dollar is its purchasing power" is totally unreasonable.

"Dollars" are not "money." Federal Reserve notes are not "dollars," but Mr. John E. Burke would like to have Federal Reserve notes accepted as "money" by his statement: "These notes are denominated in dollars, which are the unit of account of United States money." The Coinage Act of 1792 said: ". . . the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units . . .;" (". . . the money of account . . . ." not Federal Reserve notes).

The word unit does not apply to the word "dollar" as an entity (money), but rather as a synonymous term expressing equivalent quantity. There aren't any units of dollars (dollars of dollars) any more than there are Quarts of Quarts or Pounds of Pounds.

* * * * * * * *

146

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 4. July 5,1978

Federal Reserve notes are denominated in "dollars," but are not dollars, therefore do not have purchasing power. Without "purchasing power" they cannot be the medium of exchange (money). "Dollar," as a unit of value expression, does not have purchasing power. Without "purchasing power" it cannot be the medium of exchange (money). What then is the money of account of the United States which shall be expressed in dollars? What has taken the place of the gold and/or silver coin ". . . which shall by law be current as money within the united States . . . ."?

Federal Reserve notes are being accepted by the public as money and as such are clearly counterfeit.

"Counterfeit. In criminal law to forge; to copy or imitate, without authority or right, and with a view to deceive or defraud, by passing the copy or thing forged for that which is original or genuine. Most commonly applied to the fraudulent and criminal imitation of money, State v. McKensie, 42 Me. 392; U.S. v. Barrett, B.C. N.D.. Ill. F.369; DeRose v. People. 64 Colo. 332. 171 P.359. L.R.A.1918 C. 1193; Metropolitan Nat. Bank v. National Surety Co., D.C. Minn. 48 F.2d 611, 612 .

". . . there is no legal basis for an argument that a taxpayer is entitled to a refund on the grounds that Federal Reserve notes are non-redeemable or that the coinage is only reimbursable for its 3% copper-nickel content." This is certainly not frivolous, and no such finding should be allowed to stand for very long.

"Counterfeit coin. Coin not genuine, but resembling or apparently intended to resemble or pass for genuine coin, . . ." U.S. v. Hopkins, D.C.N.C., 26 F.443; U.S. v. Bogart, 24 Fed. Cas. 1185; U.S. v. Gellman. D.C. Minn., 44F.Supp. 360, 363.

I would most sincerely and most respectfully suggest that your office do what it can to perhaps influence Mr. Burke to reconsider my request for refund. Reflections upon the various provisions of the Coinage Act of 1792 make this request seem quite in order and reasonable. I trust that my analysis of Mr. Burke's correspondence will be accepted as a sincere, concerned and good faith attempt at resolving this matter.

Very truly yours,

Merrm M. E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to personal friends and interested officials.

* * * * * * * *

148

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

July 24, 1978

Additional grounds in support of request for refund:
Refer to correspondence of: April 21, 1978, May 5, 1978, May 16, 1978, May 30, 1978
Also correspondence to: Mr, John E. Burke on: July 5, 1978

Richard C. Voskuil
District Director
Internal Revenue Service
1124 Market Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63101

Dear Sir;

Time passes and the questions presented in the past correspondence continue to go unanswered. There is still a possibility that your office will respond with a proper, complete, comprehensive and equitable decision concerning my refund, or precise citations to substantiate your denial in the face of the vital issues presented in support of this request.

In the interim it would be expeditious to continue furnishing you with the additional foundations for the legal arguments it may be necessary to introduce later.

In an earlier piece of this correspondence I quoted the "law of the land" from Sixteenth American Jurisprudence Second Edition, section 177. Were it necessary to present argument on this issue, it would be necessary to acquaint the jury, if there is a jury, with their origin and function.

* * * * *

MAGNACARTA, the great Charter of our liberties was wrung from a frightened would be dictator-king at the point of a sword over 700 years ago, and is by far the most important legal document supporting our federal and state constitutions.

You - as a juror - armed merely with the knowledge of what a COMMON LAW JURY really is, and what your common law rights, powers, and duties really are, can do more to re-establish "liberty and justice for all" in this State, and ultimately throughout all of the United States, than all of our Senators and Representatives put together. Why? Because even without the concurrence of any of your fellow jurors in a criminal trial, you, with your single vote of NOT GUILTY - can nullify or invalidate any man-made law involved in a case that for one reason or another ought not to be enforced.

If you feel that the statute involved in any criminal case being tried by you is unfair, or that it Infringes upon the defendant's natural God-given inalienable, or Constitutional rights, then you must affirm that the offending statute is really no law at all, and that the violation of it is no crime at all - for no man is bound to obey an unjust command. Which means if the defendant has disobeyed some man-made criminal statute and the statute Itself is unjust, that defendant has committed no crime. Jurors - having ruled then on the justice of the law involved, and finding it opposed in whole or in part to their own natural concept of what is basically right - are bound to hold for the acquittal of said defendant.

* * * * * * * *

149

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 2, July 24, 1978

Your vote of NOT GUILTY must be respected by all other members of the jury - for you are not there as a fool, merely to agree with the majority, but as an officer of the court and a qualified judge in your own right. Regardless of the pressures or abuse that may be heaped on you by any or all members of the jury with whom you may in good conscience disagree, you can await the reading of the verdict, secure in the knowledge you have voted your own conscience and convictions - and not someone else's.

Therein lies the opportunity for the accomplishment of "liberty and justice for all." If you, and numerous other jurors throughout the state and nation begin and continue to bring in verdicts of NOT GUILTY In such cases where a man-made statute is defective or oppressive, these statutes will become as ineffective as if they had never been written. It only takes one juror to effect a verdict of NOT GUILTY in any criminal trial - a fact that could prove to be of more than passing interest to you, should you yourself be the defendant and your accuser happen to be the government.

JURY'S RIGHTS, POWERS AND DUTIES

The Charge to the Jury in the First Jury Trial before the Supreme Court of the U.S. illustrates the TRUE POWER OF THE JURY. In the February term of 1794, the Supreme Court conducted a jury trial in the case of the State of Georgia vs. " Brailsford, et. al. 3 Dall. 1 ". . . it is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumed that the courts are the best judges of law. But still both objects are within your power of decision." (Emphasis added.) ". . . you have a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy."

(State of Georgia vs. Brailsford, et al 3 Dall. 1)

As the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has clearly acknowledged, there can be no doubt that the jury has an "un-reviewable and unreversible power . . . to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge . . . ." U.S. vs. Dougherty, 473 F.2d. 1113, 1139 (1972).

Or as this same truth was stated in an earlier decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Maryland: "We recognize, as appellants urge, the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge, and contrary to the evidence. This is a power that must exist as long as we adhere to the general verdict in criminal cases, for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge. If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision." U.S. vs. Moylan, 417 F.2d. 1002, 1006 (1969).

* * * * * * * *

150

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 3, July 24, 1978

The law as written and invoked by prosecutors, "demands conviction of persons whom local or even general opinion does not desire to punish." See "Law in Books and Law in Action," Dean Roscoe Pound, 44 American Law Review, 12, 18 (1910). Hence, jury disregard of the limited and generally conviction-oriented evidence presented for its consideration, and jury disregard for what the trial judge wants them to believe, is the controlling law in any particular case (sometimes facetiously referred to as "jury lawlessness") is not something to be scrupulously avoided, but rather encouraged; as witness the following quotation from the eminent legal authority above-mentioned: "Jury lawlessness is the greatest corrective of law in its actual administration. The will of the state at large imposed on a reluctant community, the will of a majority Imposed on a vigorous and determined minority, find the same obstacle in the local jury that formerly confronted kings and ministers.'' Dougherty, cited above, note 32, at 1130.

"The pages of history shine on instances of the jury's exercise of Its prerogative to disregard uncontradicted evidence and instructions of the judge. Most often commended are the 18th century acquittal of Peter Zenger of seditious libel, on the plea of Andrew Hamilton, and the 19th century acquittals in prosecutions under the fugitive slave law. The values involved drop a notch (but are worthy of note nonetheless) when the liberty vindicated by the verdict relates to the defendant's shooting of his wife's paramour, or purchase during Prohibition of alcoholic beverages." (Dougherty, cited above, at 1130). Rather than referring to the above as instances of "jury lawlessness," we would say what appears to be far more likely that they are examples of courageous adherence, by one or more jurors in each case, to the natural law of justice - tempered perhaps by the radiant glow of a little kindness, understanding, or mercy.

In addition, the trial judge is generally spoken of as "the judge," by this he logically cannot be in a trial by jury - for in every such trial, the judges, preferably twelve in number, are all seated in the jury box. THEY are the only judge in any case being tried by them. They are there to try the case themselves, as they see it, and not as somebody else sees it. This means that the trial "judge" is neither the judge, nor even one of thirteen judges, nor even any kind of a "judge" at all. He is a judge, or rather the judge only in a non-jury trial. In a trial by a jury of twelve juror-judges, he is merely the headmaster in charge of procedure.

THE RIGHT OF THE JURY TO BE TOLD OF ITS POWER

Every jury In the country has the right to bring in a verdict based on, not whether the defendant's act or omission was merely contrary to a dictionary interpretation of the words and phrases used in some man-made statute recited to it by the trial "judge," but whether or not the defendant's act or omission was truly blameworthy according to the jury's (and representatively the community's) natural sense of morality and justice. It is a well-established principle in criminal jurisprudence that an act or omission does not make a man guilty unless he be so by intention.

* * * * * * * *

151

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 4, July 24, 1978

The right of the jury to disregard either the law (as laid down by the trial "judge") or the facts (as permitted by the same trial "judge" to be placed in evidence) is referred to in legal terminology as the jury's prerogative of nullification (jury lawlessness) which means in ordinary language that where the jurors cannot in conscience impose blame, they cannot in conscience allow punishment.

The prerogative of nullification (jury lawlessness) is not only legitimate, but a praiseworthy right of the jury as well. Prerogative nullification is a mechanism that permits the jury as spokesman for the community's conscience to disregard the strict requirements of man-made law, as well as the "judge's" instructions to the jury where it finds that those requirements cannot justly be applied in a particular case. The doctrine or prerogative of nullification "permits the jury to bring to bear on the criminal process a sense of fairness and particularized justice." (Dougherty, cited above, at 1142). These obviously are worthy objectives. Today in the courts this unassailable doctrine is concealed from the jury and is effectively condemned by the "judge" in the presence of the jury.

"The way the jury operates may be radically altered if there is alteration in the way it is told to operate." (Dougherty, cited above, at 1135). The jury's options are by no means limited to the choices presented to it in the courtroom. "The jury gets its understanding as to the arrangements in the legal system from more than one voice. There is the formal communication from the 'judge'. There is the informal communication from the total culture - literature, current comment, conversation, and, of course, history and tradition." (Dougherty, cited above at 1135). The totality of input from the above-mentioned informal sources should be such as to convey adequately enough to jurors the idea of prerogative of nullification of their freedom to decide the guilt or innocence of a defendant according to their own consciences - regardless of the "facts" permitted by the "judge" to be placed in evidence, and regardless of his "Charge to the jury." This final set of unasked-for and generally biased instructions, will contain among other things what he (the judge) considers to be the controlling law, or what the judge wants the jurors to think is the controlling law in the particular case being tried by them.

The jurors are not told either formally or informally that they have the right to judge for themselves what the controlling law is or ought to be in any particular case, and that each individual juror has the right to decide for himself what things (even though not admitted into evidence by the judge) are to be accounted as fact and what things (even though accepted as fact by the judge) are not worthy to be so accounted.

Hence, it devolves upon the Posse Comitatus - sworn to uphold the natural, God-given rights of any person who has been or is about to be victimized by any branch of federal, state, or local government - to inform every juror in the county of the duty of a juror. That duty is to

* * * * * * * *

152

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 5, July 24, 1978

decide every legal and evidentiary aspect of the case according to his own conscience, regardless of any "juror's oath" binding said juror to decide the case being tried according to the "law" (as given to him by the trial "judge") and the facts (as permitted by said "judge" to be placed in evidence), and to accept no dictation whatsoever (either as to law or fact) from the trial judge, who, in a trial by jury, is merely the chief assistant of the 12 juror-judges sworn to hear and try the case.

If there be anyone who might properly be referred to as the presiding officer in any such trial, it is the foreman of the jury - and not the trial "judge," who in every legal contest between a private party and the government, is the representative and advocate of the government, hence not even qualified to sit in judgment between the two parties; for no man ought to be a judge in his own cause. If such a "judge" had high regard for the elementary rules of justice, he would disqualify himself, and inform the twelve judges in the jury box that they are the only qualified and lawful judges that may be had in any legal dispute between a private citizen or a private corporation and any branch of federal, state, or local government.

Such a "judge" should admit further, as we allege, that any member of the above indicated jury of twelve bona fide judges has - in a criminal trial - not only that power, but also the right to effect a verdict of NOT GUILTY - if such be the verdict most agreeable to his conscience - whether affirmed by all or none of the other eleven jurors, whether in line with the program of an over-zealous or vindictive prosecuting attorney or not, and whether or not in conformity with the final "charge to the jury" by the trial "judge."

FROM PAST TO PRESENT

For more than 700 years now - that is since the 15th day of June in the year of 1215 when the embattled barons of England met King John on the meadow at Runnymede, and there forced him to sign the Great Charter of our liberties - there has been no clearer principle of constitutional law than that it is not only the right and duty jurors to judge what are the facts; what is the controlling law; and what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid that are unjust or oppressive; and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of such laws.

Unless such be the right and duty of jurors, it is plain that instead of juries being a "palladium of liberty" - a barrier against the tyranny and oppression of government - they are really mere tools in its hands, for carrying into execution any injustice and oppression that government may desire to have executed.

* * * * * * * *

153

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 6, July 24, 1978

But for each juror's right to rule on the interpretation of the law and the justice of the law, juries would be no protection to an accused person, even as to matters of fact; for if the government can dictate to the jurors any law whatever, it can certainly dictate to them the laws of evidence. That is, government can decide all on its own what evidence is admissible or inadmissible, and also what importance, if any, is to be given to the evidence admitted. If the government can thus manipulate and control the evidence that the jurors are allowed to consider, and then require them to decide according to that evidence and none other, it can also manipulate and control their deliberations in the jury room. In which case the trial is, in reality, a trial by the government and not a trial by the jury at all.

Every jury in the land is tampered with and falsely instructed by the judge when it is told it must accept as the law that which is given to them by the court, and that the jury can only decide the facts of the case. This is to destroy the purpose of a common law jury, and to permit the imposition of tyranny upon a people, who otherwise would resist by their juries' refusal to uphold unconstitutional law.

Jurors - who are the only lawful judges in any case being tried by them - are under no obligation to accept or even to be guided by the law as given to them by the government through its agent the "judge"; and there is no rule of common justice or common right by which the twelve juror-judges can be held to consider only the evidence that has met with the government's approval, or by which they can be prevented from taking other facts or circumstances into consideration. They should do, or refuse to do, whatever in their opinion is the best, from the standpoint of preventing or averting injustice. The jurors representing the people are in a legal position to effectively shelter the people from official abuse.

That is why It is necessary that jurors throughout this State and throughout the United States as well, disregard the law as laid down to them by the trial "judge," whenever the law is violate of any of the defendant's inalienable, God-given, common law or Constitutional rights.

For example, is it not true that whenever any rule or regulation is placed in the statute books, the "judge" imposes this newly adopted "law" upon the jury as being authoritative and binding (when, in fact, its binding force has never been ascertained, certainly not finally or conclusively); and the jurors through fear of offending the. "judge," bring in a verdict in accordance therewith. The authority and presumed binding force of the untested statute is thereby established (by case law or precedent - as the attorneys and the trial "judges" are quick to point out). The whole people are thus brought under the joke of the new "law," and having been upheld in one or more previous cases, it will be enforced against them in the future, should they refuse to comply with its unjust proscriptions or exactions.

* * * * * * * *

154

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 7, July 24, 1978

You - as a juror - have it within your power - as occupiers of the most important decision making office in the land - to nullify every rule or "law" that is not In accordance with the principles of natural. God-given, common, or Constitutional law. It is precisely this power of nullification that makes the trial by jury our most important right. It is the one and only right that can protect and preserve all of the citizen's other rights.

It should be abundantly clear from the foregoing that the best, most readily available, and ultimately the only real legal protection against criminal activities of elected and/or appointed officials, and against the ever-increasing usurpations of federal, state, and local government, lies in the Common Law or Magna Carta Jury as set forth in part, herein.

The Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights is designed to hold the national government in check; to protect the individual citizen from an unchecked all-powerful government. However, those documents are not a safeguard to liberty should they stand in the way of government that has either the cunning to evade their requirements, or the power to force to overcome those who would attempt to defend their Constitutional rights. Consequently, if there exists no tribunal apart from, uncontrolled by, and above the government, with power to nullify government's unjust "laws" as fast as they can be written and entered in our statute books, we are no longer free.

SUCH A TRIBUNAL DOES EXIST; THE 12-MAN-12-JUDGE, COMMON LAW JURY WHICH WAS FIRST ACCURATELY DESCRIBED IN MAGNA CARTA IN THE YEAR 1215, AND WHICH WAS PUT INTO EFFECT WITH ALL ITS POWERS BY THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES ON MARCH 4, 1789.

The honorable Theo. Parsons In the Massachusetts convention of 1788, answering the objection that the Constitution of the United States as submitted to the people for adoption, contained no Bill of Rights, said: "The people themselves have it in their power effectually to resist usurpation, without being driven to an appeal to arms. An act of usurpation is not obligatory; it is not law; and any man may be justified in his resistance. Let him be considered as a criminal by the general government, yet only his fellow citizens can convict him; they're his jury, and if they pronounce him innocent, not all the powers of Congress can hurt him; and innocent they certainly will pronounce him. If the supposed law he resisted was an act of usurpation." 2 Elliot's Debates, 94; Bancroft, History of the Constitution, 267. * * * * *

For you, or anyone, to have released a piece of material called a "final response", and signed by an "acting director", after the extensive grounds cited in support of a request for refund, is very disappointing.

* * * * * * * *

155

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 8, July 24, 1978

It makes one wonder just what the I.R.S. considers the individuals of this nation to be. Have we the people lost all vestige of dignity? Are we the people so low in your view that we do not even deserve proper response? Does the I.R.S., as an administrative agency of government, consider we the people to be their slaves? If they do, then they are no better than tyrants. Controlling the juries to convict individuals who uphold the law (U.S. Constitution), by resisting some I.R.S. unlawful (unconstitutional) dictate, is exactly how it begins.

"Where law ends, tyranny begins."

WILLIAM PITT

Conducting I.R.S· interviews, allowing as witnesses and representatives only those who are endorsed by I.R.S., is again a denial of the sovereign right of the citizen. The SECRET, hinted at, but never disclosed, citations of authority are another indication of your apparent contempt for the individual citizen.

"The closed door and sealed lips are prerequisites to tyranny."

FRANK LEBBY STANTON

For your agents to keep insisting the secrecy is necessary would be ludicrous if It were not so tragic.

"Necessity is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."

WILLIAM PITT

"Slavery is not only opposed to all the principles of morality, but, as it appears to be, is pregnant with appalling and inevitable danger to the Republic."

BARON WILHELM von HUMBOLT

"Slavery is an atrocious debasement of human nature."

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN

"Slavery is a state so improper, so degrading, so ruinous to the feelings and capacities of human nature, that it ought not to be suffered to exist."

EDMUND BURKE

"A desire to resist oppression is implanted in the nature of man."

TACITUS

* * * * * * * *

156

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 9. July 24, 1978

If the I.R.S. does not consider we the people as their slaves, then it should, please, apply itself to the following recap of the material originally tendered, in part, as grounds for requesting refund. No denial of this request for refund would be complete, or even proper, without answering these arguments in support of it, (the recap Includes some references to Mr. John E, Burke's correspondence).

"Federal Reserve notes are not dollars"

MR. JOHN E. BÜRKE, ACTING DISTRICT DIRECTOR,
Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.), JUNE 27, 1978

FEDERAL RESERVE "NOTES" ARE NOT "DOLLARS."

A Federal Reserve "note" is a piece of paper, a tangible thing, an entity - NOT a QUANTITY!

A 'dollar' is a QUANTITY - NOT an ENTITY!

". . . the money of account of the United Scales shall be expressed in dollars. . . ."

MR. JOHN E. BÜRKE, ACTING DISTRICT DIRECTOR,
Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.), JUNE 27, 1978

Dollar is a word to express a quantity of "MONEY" - not eggs, or beer, or houses, or paper.

Question 1. Since we no longer use gold or silver "money" - where - is the 'money,' that is expressed in dollar quantities, upon which I.R.S. says "income taxes" must be paid?

As the - QUANTITY EXPRESSION - "dollar" cannot also be the "money"-measured, Can there be a QUART of QUARTS? - just try to "picture" the Quart without 'seeing' the milk or the bottle!

Question 2. What - is the money - 750 units (dollars) of which must be received as "income" - to facilitate a tax liability?

Federal Reserve notes are labeled "dollars," are accepted AS "money," but being non-redeemable for specie, are NOT "money" and constitute 100% confiscation of the public's wealth without compensation.

". . . Federal Reserve notes are non-redeemable . . . the coinage is only reimbursable for its 3% copper-nickel content."

MR. JOHN E. BÜRKE, ACTING DISTRICT DIRECTOR,
Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.), JUNE 27, 1978

Question 3. By what exact statute does a 97% loss (seigniorage) become "income" to those from whom it is taken?

* * * * * * * *

157

MERRILL M.E JENKINS Sr., M.R. -- MONETARY REALIST
29 N. Meramec Suite 109
Clayton, Missouri 63105
Phone 314-777-7777

Page 10, July 24, 1978

Question 4. Isn't It true that anyone disclosing "income" is voluntarily waiving their protection under the 4th and 5th amendments to the U.S, Constitution?

Question 5. Since "income tax" is voluntary, what exact statute makes "failure to file" a crime?

Question 6. Isn't it true that 'not-filing' is not a crime - that only after "filing" and waiving their constitutional guarantees can "filers" be prosecuted for "evasion?"

Question 7. Isn't It true that since the last lawful coinage was repudiated in June 1968, this nation has no lawful "money," and no one could lawfully "incur" (bring down on one-self) or settle a tax liability based upon units (dollars) of "monetized" debt?

Surely, the I.R.S. in its role of public servant, cannot have anything to hide from the people it serves. In your own personal opinion - MR. VOSKUIL - are the above arguments frivolous?

"I hope I shall always possess firmness and virtue enough to maintain what I consider the most enviable of all cities, the character of an honest man."

GEORGE WASHINGTON

"Labor to keep alive in your heart that little spark of celestial fire called conscience."

GEORGE WASHINGTON

There cannot be any more sincerity than that with which I respectfully request that my refund be granted. This matter is an extremely serious one; I cannot understand your refusal to either grant or formally deny the request and list the precise citations, with respect to the arguments presented in this request, that would support that denial.

Again,

Very sincerely yours,

Merrill M.E. Jenkins Sr., M.R.

Copies to personal friends and Interested officials.

* * * * * * * *

Certified Mail Receipt, and Return Receipt.

* * * * * * * *

Tax Protesters Warned By IRS

(POST Wed. 7-26-78, p. 12E)

The Internal Revenue Service office here is skirmishing again with tax protesters.

The IRS director for Missouri, Richard C. Voskuil, issued another warning Tuesday about heeding "tax rebels" who claim to have discovered "loopholes" that allow taxpayers to avoid filing tax returns or paying taxes. He issued a similar warning in April 1977.

"The theories and contentions that have been advertised and publicized by tax protest advocates are not new, but they have been receiving far more publicity in recent years," Voskuil said.

Tax protesters, he said, run the risk of prison sentences and fines -- as well as having to pay back taxes, penalties, interest and costs -- if the IRS catches up with them.

In the last 18 months, he said, 12 persons in Missouri have been prosecuted by the U.S. attorney's office here for failing to file proper returns. All 12 either pleaded guilty or were convicted; 10 of the 12 have been sentenced.

All of the 10 have received jail or prison sentences ranging from two months to five years; all have been fined in amounts ranging from $500 to $21,500.

"Statements and literature that challenge the income tax on the basis of dollars not being legal tender, or that filling out a tax form violates the Fourth, Fifth or other amendments, have always been rejected by the courts." Voskuil said.

The number of tax protesters in Missouri is small, he said. The agency has identified as protest returns, about 60 of the approximately 1.8 million sent in annually.

Forms of protest prosecuted here are varied. One group of persons convicted earlier this year filed forms with their employers asking that no money be withheld from their checks to pay federal taxes.

Other protesting taxpayers have filed returns listing large numbers of dependents or no income, asserting that Federal Reserve notes are valueless. Some have refused to file completed returns, contending that questions on the forms violate various amendments to the Constitution.