“In common usage, the term “person’ does not include the Sovereign, statutes employing the word person are ordinarily construed to exclude the Sovereign.” Wilson v Ohm aha Tribe, 442 U.S. 653, 667 (1979) (quoting United States v Cooper Corp., 312 U.S. 600, 604 (1941)


An excerpt of the following has been reposted from Living In The Private for education and preservation purposes. 

Common law copyright: 2020 | Cipix: Freeman​© REML® | A-011.006.999 | All Rights Reserved

It is reposted exactly as shown on https://www.cipix.eu/living-in-the-private 

I give thanks to the author for one of the best explanations of Public v Private

Here follows an introduction:



As Shakespeare said very eloquently,

“The first thing we do is hang all the lawyers.”

Yes, and Virginia Colony was correct back in the 1700’s that the practice of lawyering was an offense punishable by death. They sure dropped the ball on that one.

So the problem at hand is that every statute is written with the term “person” in mind. Why, you ask? Well as I quoted in my book “The New History of America,” the case of Cruden v Neale, where the court states a principle of natural law so clear that it cannot be twisted by any lawyer, that man is only bound by the laws of nature. Here is what the court stated;

” When a change of government takes place, from a monarchial to a republican government, the old form is dissolved. Those who lived under it, and did not choose to become members of the new, had a right to refuse their allegiance to it, and to retire elsewhere. By being a part of the society subject to the old government, they had not entered into any engagement to become subject to any new form the majority might think proper to adopt. That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior to the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent.” CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70.

By this very principle espoused by the court you cannot be made to “retire elsewhere” because, if anything, you retire from the corporate STATE and live upon the land of the Lord in the geographical place called North Carolina rather than the State of North Carolina. Go back and look at the Hamilton case where they said that you” shall take an oath of abjuration and allegiance, or depart out of the State.” Let them keep their corporate State; depart out of it. Isn’t that what the Bible tells you “Come out of her?” What do you need it for? To continually be robbed by legal plunder? Not that they are going to stop if you do, because maybe, just maybe, the masses will wake up and want out also, thereby destroying the State’s power over you.

You see, the whole game is to control you by making you, the man, into a artificial entity called a “person.” In ordinary street language you can use the term person. But the minute you step into ANY legal arena you CANNOT use the term “person.” For to do so the other artificial person, the State, can come after another artificial character.

As the court stated above “man” is not bound by other men’s laws unless he consents. You consent when you answer to any statute containing any reference to person. The clever trick is that the statute 26 USC 7701(a) of the IRC is the definition part and it says “person” means; an individual, partnership, corporation, association. Notice that all terms defining the word “person are corporate fictions. BUT, you say, individual is not a corporate fiction because am I not an individual? Yes you are in average common street terms, but in the legal arena “individual is corporate or artificial by legal definition, because “individual,” in and of itself is defining an artificial thing as a “person.”

So how can it be a natural man? It goes against all reason and logic. The IRC Code Statute only pertains to man, who as stated above by the Professor, takes on the artificial character and becomes a “person” by legal definition. Therefore he is subject to all the legal disabilities that come with the term person and that means being subject to all the laws of the parent corporation. The parent corporation is the United States, the State is the artificial child and you are the artificial grand child. That is the best way to describe it so you can start to equate terms and meanings.

In Anderson’s Business law on the Uniform Commercial Code, I think around the sixth edition, it states that when a statute refers to artificial beings, natural people are not to be included. So, 26 USC 7701 (a) (1) uses all artificial characters to describe the artificial “person” and individual. By all reason and logic it has to be an artificial term. Just like a third grade reader shows 5 pictures and asks which one does not belong. The pictures are, a baseball, a bat, a base, a glove and a football uniform. You circle the football uniform as not fitting the idea, but the football clothes is a uniform, the same as baseball clothes is a uniform. Only one uniform fits the scheme while the other is left out, but both are uniforms. The same as individual. It is a “leading word” as the professor stated and has to be further defined the same as individual or person has to be defined. Did not the professor state the term individual and person are one in the same? Did he not also state that it is well settled in law that “person” is always an artificial person? 

Read here for more on the above: https://musicians4freedom.com/politics-philosophy/journey-down-the-rabbit-hole-rev/sovereignty/what-is-a-person/  



EVERY natural man and woman is born “in the private”. Whereas the State is public, and therefore its Public Servants, and its legal fiction creations are “in the public”, including its artificial legal “persons”.

A man or woman can either “live” “in the private”, or “act” “in the public”. However …

We are trained from an early age to accept a higher authority as normal. Most people exist in a culture of submission and conformity, allowing numerous aspects of their lives to be controlled by the Government. The populace is manipulated to become dependent (debt-money), and conditioned to become fearful (racism, terrorism, and wars). The manner and appearance of “authority” is usually intimidating by design, while the language of legal fiction commerce (Legalese) is deceptive.

You are indoctrinated to “act” in the “role” of an artificial legal “person”, which is a creation of the State and a debtor serving as “surety” for the corporate debt of YOURNATION (INC.).

Every nation with a Central Bank under the Bank for International Settlements has been indebted by the “incorporation” of its government into the debt-money system, thereby surrendering its power of sovereign money issuance.

A global system of debt-bondage has been established by “incorporating” governments, and by programming the people to “act” in the fictional “roles” of “artificial persons”, which as legal fictions having no innate productive capacity, are debtors by default, serving as “transmitting utilities” for human energy.

An artificial legal “person” is a dead entity. It is a legal fiction “persona” in the “theatre of commerce”, and it is under the foreign Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction, the international “Law of the Sea”. On the contrary, you are born into your own sovereign Estate of body, mind, and soul. As a sentient man or woman you live within the sovereign Common Law Jurisdiction, the national “Law of the Land”.

The “Common Law” follows “Natural Law”, a living system of “right or justice” held to be common to all humans and derived from Nature rather than from the rules of society. In “Natural Law”, all people are born equal and endowed with unalienable rights.

Your sovereign jurisdiction, including your inborn Unalienable Rights, cannot be taken from you without your fully informed and willing consent.

Legal “person” “actors” for incorporated governments, banks, and all corporate entities, need to contract with other legal “person” “actors” to extract their “commercial energy”.

These legal “actors” make the PRESUMPTION that you are also “acting” in the “role” of a legal “person” in “legal fiction” commerce, which is why they are seeking a contract “performance”. They ALWAYS want the NAME and often the creation date of the legal “person” to establish “joinder”, forming an “adhesion contract”. They NEED A “PERSON”, because there is absolutely no way they can contract directly with a living man or woman. They need a man or woman to CONSENT TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY IN THE MATTER OF THE “PERSON”, unknowingly or knowingly, which is JOINDER.

In this way, a man or woman becomes party to the action involving the “person”, which is “joinder” of the parties into a single case in legal fiction commerce.

When a living name is “mirrored” by the registration of an artificial legal “person” on the Birth Certificate, an Estate Trust is formed, such as MR JOHN DOE TRUST. Any living man or woman unknowingly in JOINDER to such a legal fiction NAME blindly takes responsibility for the alleged debts of the Trust as its Trustee. Whereas an aware living man or woman can separate themselves from the legal fiction NAME and become the rightful controlling Agent, Beneficiary, Executor/Executrix for MR JOHN DOE TRUST.

Legal “actors” will attempt to engage the “person” by posting letters, by phone, or on the highway, to make and enforce a contract. Misrepresenting a living man or woman as a fictional “person” causing unwitting “joinder” is the crime of “personage”, and it is perpetuated by “barratry”, the crime of bringing false claims in court. The term “barratry”, appropriately, comes from the “Bar Association”.

Under the Common Law Jurisdiction (Law of the Land), both parties must enter into every contract “knowingly”, “voluntarily”, and “intentionally”, or the contract is unenforceable and void.

However, under the Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction (Law of the Sea), consent to contract is often presumed by silent acquiescence, unless the party contracted thereby rebuts the presumption of consent.

If you do not wish to consent to their contract offer (presentment), you must Rebut The Presumption that you are “acting” in the “role” of a fictional legal “person”.

Maxim of Law:
Quid fas non veritas est. Legality is not Reality.

The first step is to separate yourself from the legal fiction. If you answer to the artificial legal “person” NAME, you contract by “joinder” to become a liable debtor. However, if you “stand” truthfully as a “man” or “woman”, not “acting” as an artificial legal “person”, the two are separated.

Because of years of conditioning, it takes time to separate the legal fiction from reality, in your mind and in the real world. A powerful and lawful approach is simply to verify everything.

You are never obliged to answer questions or to provide government issued ID. Truly, to uphold your government of the People, it is not your duty to answer questions, it is your duty to ask questions. You have the Right to know who is making a claim against you, the Right to know who the injured party is, the Right to conditionally accept any claim against you upon verification, the Right to reserve your rights without prejudice, and thereafter the Right to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination.

By failing to exercise their Rights, the People have been betrayed, and have allowed their governance to be turned against them, so that the People have been “monetized”. The original offices of de jure unincorporated government institutions have been usurped, and are mostly unoccupied by de jure public servants working for the People in a de jure public capacity. The “public” State has been captured by financial piracy, and has become a commercial enterprise, operating by contract under the Admiralty Maritime jurisdiction (Law Merchant), in the international Law of the Sea.

The following definitions apply to the de facto incorporated State, in which the agencies of government, and all artificial legal “persons”, are merely corporate franchises.

“In The Public” “In The Private”

Private: To be “in the private” is to “live” in a “private capacity” as a Man or Woman, with flesh and blood, arms and legs, a conscious mind, a spirit, and Life. All Men and Women are created as equal Sovereigns, endowed with Unalienable Rights and Properties, including Credit equating to their valuable human energy. As natural Men and Women, they are Creditors, because they are born naturally with innate productive capacities. Their right to contract is Unlimited, and they have unlimited liability, being responsible adults. They are outside and above the State. From Latin privatus “set apart, belonging to oneself (not to the state)”.

Public: To be “in the public” is to “act” in a “public capacity” as an “accommodation party” in “joinder” to an “artificial person” created and governed by the State. All Men and Women who “act” in legal fiction “roles” for the State are granted revocable Privileges and Benefits prescribed in legislative “Acts”. As Artificial Persons, they are Debtors, because they are created legally without innate productive capacities. Their right to contract is Limited, and they have limited liability, being legally incompetent “creatures of the State”, its legal children. They are inside and under the State. From Latin publicus “of the people; of the state; done for the state”.