Constitutional Concepts Foundation: One of the Most Important Reads Ever…

The Federal Reserve Act
is Unconstitutional



In order to fully understand the following documents there needs to be an 

explanation of the background behind the case.

Please note that the assignment of the case to Judge Mahoney was through 

standard lawful practices and that the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme 

Court assigned an associate justice to assist in the trial.

These action give total and complete lawful jurisdiction to the actions of the Court

We will now let the participants set the stage.



THE CREDIT RIVER DECISION

INTRODUCTION

A Minnesota Trial Court's decision holding:

the Federal Reserve Act unconstitutional and VOID
holding the National Banking Act unconstitutional and VOID
declaring a mortgage acquired by the First National Bank of Montgomery, 
Minnesota in the regular course of its business, along with the foreclosure and
the sheriff's sale, to be VOID


This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real 
and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and 
State Banks to be null and VOID.
This amounts to an emancipation of this nation from personal, national and State debt purportedly 
owed to this banking system. Every True American owes it to himself/herself, to his or her country, 
and to the people of the world for that matter, to study this decision very carefully and to understand it, 
for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.



BACKGROUND LETTER ON CREDIT RIVER MATTER
by: Jerome Daly, Attorney at Law
28 East Minnesota Street
Savage, Minnesota 55378
February 7, 1969

INTRODUCTION



On May 8, 1964 the writer executed a Note and Mortgage to the First National Bank of 
Montgomery, Minnesota, which is a member of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Both 
Banks are private owned and are a part of the Federal Reserve Banking System.
In the Spring of 1967 the writer was in arrears $476.00 in the payments on this Note and Mortgage. 
The Note was secured by a Mortgage on real property in Spring Lake Township in Scott County, 
Minnesota. The Bank foreclosed by advertisement and bought the property at a Sheriff's Sale held 
on June 26, 1967 and did not redeem with the 12 month period of time allotted by law after the Sheriff's 
Sale.

The Bank brought the Action to recover the possession to the property in the Justice of the Peace 
Court at Savage, Minnesota. The first 2 Justices were disqualified by Affidavit of Prejudice. The 
first by the writer and the Second by the Bank. A third one refused to handle the case. It was then 
sent, pursuant to law, to Martin V. Mahoney, Justice of the Peace, Credit River Township, Scott 
County, Minnesota, who presided at a Jury trial on December 7, 1968. The Jury found the Note 
and Mortgage to be void for failure of a lawful consideration and refused to give any validity to 
the Sheriff's Sale. Verdict was for the writer with costs in the amount of $75.00.

The president of the Bank admitted that the Bank created the money and credit upon its own 
books by which it acquired or gave as consideration for the Note; that this was standard banking 
practice, that the credit first came into existence when they created it; that he knew of no United 
States Statutes which gave them the right to do this. This is the universal practice of these Banks. 
The Justice who heard the case handed down the opinion attached and included herein. Its 
reasoning is sound. It will withstand the test of time. This is the first time the question has been 
passed upon in the United States. I predict that this decision will go into the History Books as
one of the great Documents of American History. It is a huge cornerstone wrenched from the 
temple of Imperialism and planted as one of the solid foundation stones of Liberty.

/s/ JEROME DALY
SAVAGE, MINNESOTA

A WORD FROM AN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE
WHO KNEW AND WORKED WITH
JUSTICE MARTIN V. MAHONEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ABOUT THE CASE.

The "Credit River Decision" handed down by a jury of 12 on a cold day in December, in the Credit 
River Township Hall, was an experience that I'll never forget. The Chief Justice of the Minnesota 
Supreme Court had phoned me a week before the trial and asked me if I would be an associate 
justice in assisting Justice Martin V. Mahoney since he had never handled a jury trial before. I 
accepted, and it took me two hours to get my car running in the 22 below zero weather. I got 
to the courtroom about 30 minutes before trial, and helped get the wood stove going, since 
the trial was being held in an unheated storeroom of a general store. This was the first time I 
met Justice Mahoney, and I was impressed with his no nonsense manner of handling matters before 
him. My object was to help pick the jury, and to keep Jerome Daly and the attorney representing 
the Bank of Montgomery from engaging in a fist fight. The courtroom was highly charged, and the 
Jury was all business.
The banker testified about the mortgage loan given to Jerome Daly, but then Daly cross examined 
the banker about the creating of money "out of thin air," and the banker admitted that this was 
standard banking practice. When Justice Mahoney heard the banker testify that he could "create 
money out of thin air," Mahoney said, "It sounds like fraud to me." I looked at the faces of the 
jurors, and they were all agreeing with Mahoney by shaking their heads and by the looks on their 
faces. I must admit that up until that point, I really didn't believe Jerome's theory, and thought
 he was making this up. After I heard the testimony of the banker, my mouth had dropped open 
in shock, and I was in complete disbelief. There was no doubt in my mind that the Jury would find 
for Daly. Jerome Daly had taken on the banks, the Federal Reserve Banking System, and the money 
lenders, and had won.
It is now twenty eight years since this "Landmark Decision," and Justice Mahoney is quoted more 
often than any Supreme Court justice ever was. The money boys that run the "private Federal Reserve 
Bank" soon got back at Mahoney by poisoning him in what appeared to have been a fishing boat 
accident (but with his body pumped full of poison) in June of 1969, less than 6 months later.

Both Jerome Daly and Justice Martin V. Mahoney are truly the greatest men that I have ever had 
the pleasure to meet. The Credit River Decision was and still is the most important legal decision 
ever decided by a Jury. - Bill Drexler



JUDGMENT AND DECREE

The above-entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7, 1968 at 10:00 am. 
Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel, R. 
Mellby. Defendant appeared on his own behalf. A Jury of Talesmen were called, impaneled and 
sworn to try the issues in the Case. Lawrence V. Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff, 
and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own behalf. Plaintiff brought this as a Common 
Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19 Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minn. 
Plaintiff claimed title to the Real Property in question by foreclosure of a Note and Mortgage 
Deed dated May 8, 1964, which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time foreclosure proceedings 
were started.



IN THE JUSTICE COURT 
STATE OF MINNESOTA 
COUNTY OF SCOTT 
TOWNSHIP OF CREDIT RIVER

JUSTICE MARTIN V. MAHONEY

First National Bank of Montgomery, Plaintiff vs Jerome Daly, Defendant

JUDGMENT AND DECREE

The above entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7, 1968 at 10:00 am. 
Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel, R. Mellby. 
Defendant appeared on his own behalf. A Jury of Talesmen were called, impaneled and sworn to 
try the issues in the Case. Lawrence V.  Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff and Defendant 
testified as the only witness in his own behalf.
Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19 Fairview 
Beach, Scott County, Minn. Plaintiff claimed title to the Real Property in question by foreclosure 
of a Note and Mortgage Deed dated May 8, 1964 which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time 
foreclosure proceedings were started. Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created 
the money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note 
and Mortgage of May 8, 1964 and alleged failure of the consideration for the Mortgage Deed and 
alleged that the Sheriff's sale passed no title to plaintiff. The issues tried to the Jury were whether 
there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant had waived his rights to complain about 
the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years. Mr. Morgan admitted that all of the 
money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books, that this was 
standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank 
of Minneapolis, another private Bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that 
gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this. Plaintiff further claimed that Defendant by using the ledger 
book created credit and by paying on the Note and Mortgage waived any right to complain about 
the Consideration and that the Defendant was estopped from doing so.
At 12:15 on December 7, 1968 the Jury returned a unanimous verdict for the Defendant.

Now therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, 
the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, theConstitution of United States and the Constitution and the laws 
of the State of Minnesota not inconsistent therewith;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

1.	That the Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County,
        Minnesota according to the Plat thereof on file in the Register of Deeds office.

2.	That because of failure of a lawful consideration the Note and Mortgage dated May 8, 1964 are 
    null and void.

3.	That the Sheriff's sale of the above described premises held on June 26, 1967 is null and void, 
     of no effect.

4.	That the Plaintiff has no right title or interest in said premises or lien thereon as is above described.

5.	That any provision in the Minnesota Constitution and any Minnesota Statute binding the jurisdiction 
    of this Court is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and to the Bill of Rights of 
    the Minnesota Constitution and is null and void and that this Court has jurisdiction to render 
    complete Justice in this Cause. The following memorandum and any supplementary memorandum
   made and filed by this Court in support of this Judgment is hereby made a part hereof by reference.



BY THE COURT 
Dated December 9, 1968 
Justice MARTIN V. MAHONEY 
Credit River Township

Scott County, Minnesota

MEMORANDUM

The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute of the facts for the Jury to resolve.

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all 
practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions 
Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same 
Bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. 
That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the 
same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted 
that no United States Law Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration 
must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See Ansheuser-Busch Brewing Company v. Emma 
Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558. The Jury found that there was no consideration and I agree. 
Only God can create something of value out of nothing.
Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this is no defense 
to the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of 
Am Jur 2nd "Actions" on page 584 – "no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in 
any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which 
Plaintiff was a party." Plaintiff's act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and 
Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the 
eyes of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful right can be built. Nothing in the 
Constitution of the United States limits the jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of original Jurisdiction 
with right of trial by Jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law action. Minnesota 
cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties. 
Any provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota which attempt to do so is repugnant to the 
Constitution of the United States and void. No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court was raised 
by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts to 
the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit.

No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions 
made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was direct and clear for the Jury. Their Verdict could not 
reasonably been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without denial, promptly and 
without delay, freely and without purchase, conformable to the laws in this Court of December 7, 1968.



JEROME DALY'S OWN ENTRY
REGARDING JUSTICE MAHONEY'S MEMORANDUM

FORWARD: The above Judgment was entered by the Court on December 9, 1968. The 
issue there was simple - Nothing in the law gave the Banks the right to create money 
on their books. The Bank filed a Notice of Appeal within 10 days. The Appeals statutes 
must be strictly followed, otherwise the District Court does not acquire Jurisdiction upon 
Appeal. 
To effect the Appeal the Bank had to deposit $2.00 with the Clerk within 10 days for payment 
to the Justice when he made his return to the District Court. The Bank deposited two $1.00 
Federal Reserve Notes. The Justice refused the Notes and refused to allow the Appeal 
upon the grounds that the Notes were unlawful and void for any purpose. The Decision 
is addressed to the legality of these Notes and the Federal Reserve System.
The Cases of Edwards v. Kearnzey and Craig v. Missouri set out in the decision should 
be studied very carefully as they bear on the inviolability of Contracts. This is the crux 
of the whole issue. Jerome Daly.

SPECIAL NOTATION. Justice Mahoney denied the use of Federal Reserve Notes, since they 
represent debt instruments, not true money, from being used to pay for the appeal process 
itself. In order to get this overturned, since the bank's appeal without the payment being 
recognized was out of time, it would have required that the Bank of Montgomery, 
Minnesota bring a Title 42, Section 1983 action against the judicial act of Justice 
Mahoney for a violation of the Constitution of the United States under color of law or 
authority, and if successful, have the case remanded back to him to either retry the 
case or allow the appeal to go through. But the corrupt individuals behind the bank(s) 
were unable to ever elicit such a decision from any federal court due to the fact that 
because of their vile hatred for him and what he had done to them and their little Queen's 
Scheme, had him murdered (same as them murdering him) just about 6 months later. 
And so, the case stands, just as it was. Amazingly, if they hadn't been so arrogant about 
the value of their federal reserve notes and paid the Justice just 2 measly silver dollars, 
or else 4 measly half dollars, or else 8 measly quarters, or else 20 measly dimes, or else 
40 measly nickels, or else 200 measly pennies, they could have had their appeal and would 
not have had to get blood on their hands. As it is, they are now known for their bloody ways, 
and the day will come when the American people will reap vengeance upon them for such 
a heinous and villainous act. Amen.



BY THE COURT
December 9, 1968
Justice Martin V. Mahoney
Credit River Township

Scott County, Minnesota

Note: It has never been doubted that a Note given on a Consideration which is prohibited by law 
is void. It has been determined; by independent of Acts of Congress, that sailing under the license 
of an enemy is illegal. The emission of Bills of Credit upon the books of these private Corporations 
for the purpose of private gain is not warranted by the Constitution of the United States and is unlawful. 
See Craig v. Mo. 4 Peters Reports 912. This Court can tread only that path which is marked out by duty.
 M.V.M.
JEROME DALY had his own information to reveal about this case, which establishes that between 
his own revealed information and the fact that Justice Martin V. Mahoney was murdered 6 months 
after he entered the Credit River Decision on the books of the Court, why the case was never legally 
overturned, nor can it be.



ASSOCIATION JUSTICE'S LETTER OF EXPLANATION

Jerome Daly was from Savage Minn. and a close friend of mine. The "Credit River" decision (was) 
where a jury in a Justice of the Peace court trial found that Federal Reserve Notes were not 
Moneys of Account of the United States and the court in his opinion found them to be 'FRAUDS'.

This case was on Dec. 7, 1968 before Justice Martin V. Mahoney of Credit River Minn. and I was 
an associated Justice since Justice Mahoney had never tried a jury trial and I was asked by 
Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court, Oscar Knutson, (commonly known as "King Knute") 
to assist Justice Mahoney, since the Bank of Montgomery was represented by an attorney, and 
Jerome Daly was an attorney, and the case was about "Failure of Consideration" by a bank in a 
mortgage foreclosure on Jerome's cabin at Prior Lake, Minn..Justice Mahoney declared that only 
"Gold and Silver Coins" were moneys of account of the United States, and that the Constitution 
is still the LAW today. "No state shall make any "THING" but Gold and Silver Coin a tender in payment 
of debts..."

And of course since the Federal Government had been given only 18 to 20 powers under the Constitution 
it was a "Limited Government", and according to the 9th and 10th amendments the states and the people 
were Sovereign, and retained for themselves all of the other rights not specifically given to the Feds.

When news of the jury's decision was picked up by Vern Myers and written about in his newsletter, 
"Myers Finance and Commerce" and sent world wide the whole world was afraid to accept FRAUDS 
and it got so big that they had Justice Mahoney killed within 6 months and Jerome and I had a couple 
of close calls too.

I've published the book: "The Credit River Decision" for 20 years now, but sold my last copy about 
6 months ago, since like Waco, no one was interested in it after the Govt put their "SPIN DOCTORS' 
to work to try to discredit it. This like the "Special Appearance" really needs to be studied to learn the 
real truth about our "Funny Money" system of creating Money "Out of thin Air" by the Banksters.

During the trial, on cross examination the President of the "Bank of Montgomery" testified that the 
Banks regularly "create money out of thin air."

Jerome asked the Bank President:

"If you were just opening up your bank and no one had yet made a deposit, and I came into your bank, 
and wanted to take out a loan of $18,000.00, could you loan me that money?

When the Bank President said, "Yes." I thought the jury would faint.

Jerome than said , "Does this mean that you can create money out of thin air?"

The Bank President said: "Yes. We can create money out of thin air."

Justice Mahoney then said "IT SOUNDS LIKE FRAUD TO ME" and everybody in the court room nodded 
their heads indicating that they agreed with Justice Mahoney.

The jury went out and returned a verdict in favor of Jerome Daly on the basis that the Federal Reserve 
Notes were not legal and valid consideration for a mortgage note contract.

Those that have a copy of "The Credit River Decision" just won't part with it, and it's too expensive to 
print just a few copies, so I really don't know where you'll get a copy.

Good luck on your case, and I hoped that I helped you a little.

Bill Drexler



LINCOLN ON TEACHING THE CONSTITUTION

Abe Lincoln said teach the Constitution in our schools, preach it from the pulpits.
We see the Internet is both and more.



SYNOPSIS OF CREDIT RIVER DECISION

Following are two letters giving a brief synopsis by Minnesota Attorney Jerome Daly, concerning 
his "Credit River Decision" from December 7, 1968.


I have a complete transcript of this case, including the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, as 
well as Jerome Daly's scathing letter to the members of the Bar, to whom Jerome refers to as
 
"The Boys in the Back Room."


The letter is addressed to Patrick Foley, U.S. Attorney for Minnesota on December 27, 1968, and 
follows below here, in addition to Jerome's "Introduction" letter. Further below my e-mail signature
line is a letter from Bill Drexler, who was an associate Justice in the Jerome Daly case in 
Minnesota, which you should find VERY interesting.


I had a chance to meet and confer with Jerome Daly in 1991, when he assisted me with an unlawful 
foreclosure on my home in Puyallup. That case is not over yet. At that time he was living out in 
California. He drafted some of the legal documents on my behalf. The brief he prepared in support 
of my position will knock your socks off. One of these days I'll post it with attachments, because it 
does take a "picture" to explain the fraud. If any of you still have Federal Reserve Notes, circa 
1920's through the 1960's, you know what I'm talking about. And if you research and read Public Law 
90-269 of March 18, 1968 followed by the Legislative History of Public Law 94-564, and the contents of 
Public Law 95-147 on October 28, 1977, you will begin to understand the FRAUD that has been 
perpetrated by the Congress of the United States upon the People of this Nation. Public Officials 
need to be held STRICTLY accountable to their Oath of Office and the Law of the Land.


In my case, a certain Court Commissioner and a Superior Court Judge are yet to be prosecuted 
for their fraudulent perpetrations. Sometimes the wheels of "Justice" move slowly - but they will 
ONLY move when forced to do so by the Citizenry -- "We the People" -- who hold ALL the power 
over our ordained and established Constitution, Bill of Rights, and proper Organs of Government 
through Delegated Powers and Authority to Act on OUR behalf.


Perhaps after reading this you'll begin to understand why those who are enlightened to the fraud 
try to deal in Coin, as it is the ONLY medium of exchange specifically authorized under the 
Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 & 6, and Article I, Section 10, as well as the 
Coinage Act of 1792, neither of which has ever been repealed, notwithstanding the fraudulent 
assertions otherwise by the totally compromised and corrupted Congress and Legislatures. As 
the Maxim of Law states, "Fraud and Justice never dwell together." And it should be remarked 
here that thanks to Congressman Philip M. Crane, you NOW have Gold and Silver Coin pursuant 
to Public Law 99-61 (July 9, 1985) and Public Law 99-185 (December 17, 1985).


These two Public Laws made it possible for the minting and distribution of American Gold Eagles 
and Silver Eagles, available at your local Coin shop. Everyone should have some real "money" in 
their possession; but you need to know that your PAPER Federal Reserve Note with $1 printed on 
it won't buy a One Dollar Silver Eagle -- you'll have to give about $8.00 to $9.00 FRN's for the REAL 
"Dollar". Read Public Law 90-269 and you'll understand why. The paper FRN and the Silver dollar 
should be at "parity".


By the way, "FRAUD" stands not only for the crime, but "Federal Reserve Accounting Unit Device".


Mr. Daly passed away a couple of years ago . . . but his Credit River Decision lives on, even though 
the members of the Bar have sought to suppress this case from public view. It is probably fitting to 
insert here Jerome's "Introduction" letter of February 7, 1969, as well as a copy of the letter to the 
US Attorney on December 27, 1968, so you have some idea of the gravity of what occurred, and before 
you read what Bill Drexler, a friend of Jerome, wrote below my signature line. I quote herein the two 
letters, as follows:



Jerome Daly
Attorney At Law
28 East Savage Street
Savage, Minnesota 55378
December 27, 1968

Mr. Patrick Foley
United states Attorney for Minnesota
United States Court House Bldg.
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Re: First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly

Sir:
As you are on my mailing list, at your request, attached kindly find 2 copies of a decision rendered 
at Credit River Twp. Justice of the Peace court on December 9, 1968 by Justice Martin V. Mahoney, 
who by occupation is not dependent upon the fraudulent Federal Reserve Mob for his sustenance; 
thus he was able to view the whole fraud, which is Global in scope, with a mind in the settled 
calmness of impartiality, disinterestedness, and fairness, in keeping with his Oath and with a 
completely friendly feeling toward the Constitution of the United States of America.


In truth and in fact the Justice of the Peace Court is the highest Court in the land as it is the closest 
to the People. Every Judge who is dependent upon this fraudulent Federal Reserve, National and 
State Banking System for his sole support is DISQUALIFIED because of self interest and had no 
jurisdiction to sit in review of this Judgment. If any Appellate Court, including the Supreme Court 
of the United States, in review of this Judgment, perpetrates a fraud upon the People by defying 
the Constitutional Law of the United States, Mahoney has resolved that he will convene another 
Jury in Credit River Township to try the issue of the Fraud on the part of any State or Federal 
Judge, and in an action on my part to recover the possession if the Jury decides in my favor, the 
Constable and the Citizens Militia of Credit River Township will, pursuant to the Law, deliver me 
back into possession. So you see, this Justice of the Peace can keep the peace in Scott County, 
Minnesota, not with the help of these State and Federal Judges who have fled reality, but in spite 
of them. This Thomas Jefferson's prophesy with reference to Chattel Slavery once again rings true; 
"God's Justice will not sleep forever.". (emphasis added - now you may understand one of the lawful 
purposes of the Militia!)

One wonders sometimes what the United States, and its leaders, including the Shylock usury element, 
did to bring on a Pea[r]l Harbor Attack on December 7, 1941, with such suddenness and devastation. 
It could be the Judgment of a Just God giving vent to a stored wrath in retaliation to the money 
changers. It is ironic in deed that the Jury should return its verdict on the same day 27 years later 
and the National and International Banking and Oil Mob shudder in their back rooms where they 
have cornered the money of the World and where they sit pulling the strings; fostering, conniving 
and perpetrating War with profit to themselves paid for by the blood, sweat, tears and toil of the 
farmer, the mechanic, the laborer and the humbler members of society; and well they might tremble, 
for, as they listen they can hear, with every increasing distinctness, the sound of the waves at low 
tide as they wash across the lonely decks of the U.S.S. Arizona with over 2,500 men entombed in her 
hold, with oil still seeping therefrom to the surface. It is better to be charitable than miserly, 
honest than dishonest, direct than indirect, upright than underhanded, intelligent than unintelligent, 
to have courage than be a coward, to be free than slave, in body and in mind.

I remain, Quite Independently Yours,

/s/ Jerome Daly

P.S. Give my best wishes for a New Year to the Boys in the Back Room.
J.D.



USEFUL QUOTATIONS TO ACT UPON

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance does whatever is dictated to it."
--Thomas Paine, Rights of Man ("Conclusion")

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."
--Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch) 137 (1803)