The Vatican Discovery Doctrine, United States Supreme Court and Garveyland Independence

In 1823, the Vatican Discovery Doctrine was overtly adopted as legal precedence by the Supreme Court in Johnson v. McIntosh, 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543.
Then Chief Justice John Marshall, writing the unanimous decision of the court observed that Christian European nations had assumed "ultimate dominion" over the lands of North America during the so-called "Age of Discovery", and that - upon "discovery", that the Native Inhabitants-- had lost "their rights to complete sovereignty, as independent nations," but recognized natives retained a right of "occupancy" in their lands.
Consequently, Natives are now subjected to the sole authority of the first nation of Christendom to claim possession of any native lands.
The Syllabus reads as follows:
"A title to lands under grants to private individuals made by Indian tribes or nations northwest of the River Ohio in 1773 and 1775 cannot be recognized in the courts of the United States.
Discovery the original foundation of titles to land on the American continent as between the different European nations by whom conquests and settlements were made here.
Recognition of the same principle in the wars, negotiations, and treaties between the different European powers. Adoption of the same principle by the United States.
The exclusive right of the British government to the lands occupied by the Indians has passed to that of the United States.
Foundation and limitation of the right of conquest.
Application of the principle of the right of conquest to the case of the Indian savages. Nature of the Indian title, as subordinate to the absolute ultimate title of the government."-."----21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543
Marshall went on further to opine for the court:
"1st. That on 23 May, 1609, James I, King of England, by his letters patent of that date, under the great seal of England, did erect, form, and establish Robert, Earl of Salisbury, and others, his associates, in the letters patent named and their successors into a body corporate and politic by the name and style of "The Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and Planters of the City of London for the first Colony in Virginia," with perpetual succession and power to make, have, and use a common seal, and did give, grant, and confirm unto this company, and their successors," Page 21 U. S. 544
By what and whose authority did King James grant a charter to lands, to his commercial company of "Adventurers" (read: thieves, robbers, looters and killers), well reading further we find the answer to the question:
"On the discovery of this immense continent, the great nations of Europe were eager to appropriate to themselves so much of it as they could respectively acquire. Its vast extent offered an Page 21 U. S. 573
ample field to the ambition and enterprise of all, and the character and religion of its inhabitants afforded an apology for considering them as a people over whom the superior genius of Europe might claim an ascendency.
The potentates of the old world found no difficulty in convincing themselves that they made ample compensation to the inhabitants of the new by bestowing on them civilization and Christianity in exchange for unlimited independence.
But as they were all in pursuit of nearly the same object, it was necessary, in order to avoid conflicting settlements and consequent war with each other, to establish a principle which all should acknowledge as the law by which the right of acquisition, which they all asserted should be regulated as between themselves.
This principle was that discovery gave title to the government by whose subjects or by whose authority it was made against all other European governments, which title might be consummated by possession. The exclusion of all other Europeans necessarily gave to the nation making the discovery the sole right of acquiring the soil from the natives and establishing settlements upon it. It was a right with which no Europeans could interfere. It was a right which all asserted for themselves, and to the assertion of which by others all assented"--Page 21 U. S. 574
What people in their right mind would give their land, their heritage and sovereignty over to a nation of brigands, thieves and murders, to be made homeless beggars in the land of their forefathers given to them by virtue of birth and the will of a beneficent creator?
The lands were stolen through a war of conquest waged against the natives by the Kings of Europe who were placed on their respective thrones by the Pope who controlled the Vatican of their day, hence Marshall goes on to explain:
"While the different nations of Europe respected the right of the natives as occupants, they asserted the ultimate dominion to be in themselves, and claimed and exercised, as a consequence of this ultimate dominion, a power to grant the soil while yet in possession of the natives. These grants have been understood by all to convey a title to the grantees, subject only to the Indian right of occupancy.
The history of America from its discovery to the present day proves, we think, the universal recognition of these principles.
Spain did not rest her title solely on the grant of the Pope. Her discussions respecting boundary, with France, with Great Britain, and with the United States all show that she placed in on the rights given by discovery. Portugal sustained her claim to the Brazils by the same title.
France also founded her title to the vast territories she claimed in America on discovery. However Page 21 U. S. 575
conciliatory her conduct to the natives may have been, she still asserted her right of dominion over a great extent of country not actually settled by Frenchmen and her exclusive right to acquire and dispose of the soil which remained in the occupation of Indians. Her monarch claimed all Canada and Acadie as colonies of France at a time when the French population was very inconsiderable and the Indians occupied almost the whole country. He also claimed Louisiana, comprehending the immense territories watered by the Mississippi and the rivers which empty into it, by the title of discovery. Page 21 U. S. 576
Marshall continues to explain the various patents which were purportedly granted and to whom by “European Potentates”, who had no authority over the natives of this land:
“The letters patent granted to the Sieur Demonts in 1603, constitute him Lieutenant General, and the representative of the King in Acadie, which is described as stretching from the 40th to the 46th degree of north latitude, with authority to extend the power of the French over that country and its inhabitants, to give laws to the people, to treat with the natives and enforce the observance of treaties, and to parcel out and give title to lands according to his own judgment.
The states of Holland also made acquisitions in America and sustained their right on the common principle adopted by all Europe. They allege, as we are told by Smith in his History of New York, that Henry Hudson, who sailed, as they say, under the orders of their East India Company, discovered the country from the Delaware to the Hudson, up which he sailed to the 43d degree of north latitude, and this country they claimed under the title acquired by this voyage.” Page 21 U. S. 576
Why is this important to the inhabitants of Tubman City Garveyland???
I intentionally skipped over some pages of the decision to answer the first question as it was contained on the decision and not the history this was necessary to validate the claims of the People of Tubman City, Garveyland, who have declared their Independence and Sovereignty from the Vatican, the United States, and the State of Maryland all who claim authority, control, and power of the lands further described in the background of the case:"
4th. That in the year 1624, this corporation was dissolved by due course of law and all its powers, together with its rights of soil and jurisdiction under the letters patent in question were revested in the Crown of England, whereupon the colony became a royal government with the same territorial limits and extent which had been established by the letters patent, and so continued until it became a free and independent state, except so far as its limits and extent were altered and curtailed by the Treaty of February 10, 1763, between Great Britain and France and by the letters patent granted by the King of England”--Page 21 U. S. 546
for establishing the Colonies of Carolina, Maryland, and Pennsylvania.
5th. That sometime previous to the year 1756, the French government, laying a claim to the country west of the Alleghany or Appalachian Mountains on the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers and their branches, took possession of certain parts of it with the consent of the several tribes or nations of Indians possessing and owning them, and with the like consent established several military posts and settlements therein, particularly at Kaskaskias, on the River Kaskaskias, and at Vincennes, on the River Wabash, within the limits of the Colony of Virginia, as described and established in and by the letters patent of May 23, 1609, and that the government of Great Britain, after complaining of these establishments as encroachments and remonstrating against them, at length, in the year 1756, took up arms to resist and repel them, which produced a war between those two nations wherein the Indian tribes inhabiting and holding the countries northwest of the Ohio and on the Mississippi above the mouth of the Ohio were the allies of France, and the Indians known by the name of the Six Nations or the Iroquois and their tributaries and allies were the allies of Great Britain, and that on 10 February, 1763, this war was terminated by a definitive treaty of peace between Great Britain and France and their allies by which it was stipulated and agreed that the River Mississippi, from its source to the Iberville, should forever after form the boundary between the dominions of---Page 21 U. S. 547
Great Britain and those of France in that part of North America and between their respective allies there.
6th. That the government of Virginia, at and before the commencement of this war and at all times after it became a royal government, claimed and exercised jurisdiction, with the knowledge and assent of the government of Great Britain, in and over the country northwest of the River Ohio and east of the Mississippi as being included within the bounds and limits described and established for that colony, by the letters patent of May 23, 1609, and that in the year 1749, a grant of six hundred thousand acres of land within the country northwest of the Ohio and as part of Virginia was made by the government of Great Britain to some of its subjects by the name and style of the Ohio Company.
7th. That at and before the commencement of the war in 1756 and during its whole continuance and at the time of the Treaty of February 10, 1763, the Indian tribes or nations inhabiting the country north and northwest of the Ohio and east of the Mississippi as far east as the river falling into the Ohio called the Great Miami were called and known by the name of the Western Confederacy of Indians, and were the allies of France in the war, but not her subjects, never having been in any manner conquered by her, and held the country in absolute sovereignty as independent nations, both as to the right of jurisdiction and sovereignty and the right of soil, except a few military posts and a small territory around each, Page 21 U. S. 548 “which they had ceded to France, and she held under them, and among which were the aforesaid posts of Kaskaskias and Vincennes, and that these Indians, after the treaty, became the allies of Great Britain, living under her protection as they had before lived under that of France, but were free and independent, owing no allegiance to any foreign power whatever and holding their lands in absolute property, the territories of the respective tribes being separated from each other and distinguished by certain natural marks and boundaries to the Indians well known, and each tribe claiming and exercising separate and absolute ownership in and over its own territory, both as to the right of sovereignty and jurisdiction and the right of soil.
8th. That among the tribes of Indians thus holding and inhabiting the territory north and northwest of the Ohio, east of the Mississippi, and west of the Great Miami, within the limits of Virginia, as described in the letters patent of May 23, 1609, were certain independent tribes or nations called the Illinois or Kaskaskias and the Piankeshaw or Wabash Indians, the first of which consisted of three several tribes united into one and called the Kaskasias, the Pewarias, and the Cahoquias; that the Illinois owned, held, and inhabited, as their absolute and separate property, a large tract of country within the last mentioned limits and situated on the Mississippi, Illinois, and Kaskaskias Rivers and on the Ohio below the mouth of the Wabash, and the Piankeshaws another large tract of country within the same” Page 21 U. S. 549 “..limits, and as their absolute and separate property, on the Wabash and Ohio Rivers, and that these Indians remained in the sole and absolute ownership and possession of the country in question until the sales made by them in the manner herein after set forth.
9th. That on the termination of the war between Great Britain and France, the Illinois Indians, by the name of the Kaskaskias tribes of Indians, as fully representing all the Illinois tribes then remaining, made a treaty of peace with Great Britain and a treaty of peace, limits, and amity, under her mediation, with the Six Nations, or Iroquois, and their allies, then known and distinguished by the name of the Northern Confederacy of Indians, the Illinois being a part of the confederacy then known and distinguished by the name of the Southern Confederacy, and sometimes by that of the Western Confederacy.
10th. That on 7 October, 1763, the King of Great Britain made and published a proclamation for the better regulation of the countries ceded to Great Britain by that treaty, which proclamation is referred to and made part of the case.
11th. That from time immemorial and always up to the present time, all the Indian tribes or nations of North America, and especially the Illinois and Piankeshaws and other tribes holding, possessing, and inhabiting the said countries north and northeast of the Ohio east of the Mississippi and west of the Great Miami held their respective lands and territories each in common, the individuals” Page 21 U. S. 550
“...of each tribe or nation holding the lands and territories of such tribe in common with each other, and there being among them no separate property in the soil, and that their sole method of selling, granting, and conveying their lands, whether to governments or individuals, always has been from time immemorial and now is for certain chiefs of the tribe selling to represent the whole tribe in every part of the transaction, to make the contract, and execute the deed, on behalf of the whole tribe, to receive for it the consideration, whether in money or commodities, or both, and finally to divide such consideration among the individuals of the tribe, and that the authority of the chiefs so acting for the whole tribe is attested by the presence and assent of the individuals composing the tribe, or some of them, and by the receipt by the individuals composing the tribe of their respective shares of the price, and in no other manner.
12th. That on 5 July, 1773, certain chiefs of the Illinois Indians, then jointly representing, acting for, and being duly authorized by that tribe in the manner explained above, did by their deed poll, duly executed and delivered and bearing date on that day, at the post of Kaskaskias, then being a British military post, and at a public council there held by them for and on behalf of the said Illinois nation of Indians withWilliam Murray, of the Illinois country, merchant, acting for himself and for Moses Franks and Jacob Franks, of London, in Great Britain, David Franks, John Inglis, Bernard Gratz, Michael” Page 21 U. S. 551
“.....Gratz, Alexander Ross, David Sproat, and James Milligan, all of Philadelphia, in the p\Province of Pennsylvania; Moses Franks, Andrew Hamilton, William Hamilton, and Edmund Milne of the same place; Joseph Simons otherwise called Joseph Simon and Levi Andrew Levi of the Town of Lancaster in Pennsylvania; Thomas Minshall of York County in the same province; Robert Callender and William Thompson, of Cumberland County in the same province; John Campbell of Pittsburgh in the same province; and George Castles and James Ramsay of the Illinois country, and for a good and valuable consideration in the said deed stated grant, bargain, sell, alien, lease, enfeoff, and confirm to the said William Murray, Moses Franks, Jacob Franks, David Franks, John Inglis, Bernard Gratz, Michael Gratz, Alexander Ross, David Sproat, James Milligan, Andrew Hamilton, William Hamilton, Edmund Milne Joseph Simons, otherwise called Joseph Simon Levi Andrew Levi, Thomas Minshall, Robert Callender, William Thompson, John Campbell, George Castles, and James Ramsay, their heirs and assigns forever, in severalty, or to George the Third, then King of Great Britain and Ireland, his heirs and successors, for the use, benefit, and behoof of the grantees, their heirs and assigns, in severalty, by whichever of those tenures they might most legally hold, all those two several tracts or parcels of land situated, lying, and being within the limits of Virginia on the east of the Mississippi, northwest of the Ohio, and west of the Great Miami, and thus butted.”--Page 21 U. S. 552
The whites that came to the Americas had no authority, nor can those in authority, control and power of the Corporate Bodi Politics known as the United States, the State of Maryland, the State of Virginia, the State of Illinois, or any other fictitious juristic commercial entity can produce a valid deed or contract from any so-called “chiefs” who had the signatures and authorities of all the native population to deed over the land of America over to representatives of European kings commercial corporations.
Even in following their own doctrine of the law of contracts no chief could sign over a peoples inheritance, without each individuals consent and signature.
Let’s revisit this statement written by Marshall : “This principle was that discovery gave title to the government by whose subjects or by whose authority it was made against all other European governments, which title might be consummated by possession.”
A court of 9 white men came together in Washington, D.C. to validate the land theft of America through legal sophistry, and enslaved not just the native inhabitants of North America through Papal Bulls such as Inter Caetera Divina of Vatican in 1493, and it is important for the People of Tubman City to note that, these legal fallacies have no jurisdiction over our daily lives and we need but disassociate ourselves from the legal fictions of our captors and tormentor having already claimed our independence from fraudulent actions of a pretended corporate body politic established by King James I of England, and his lawyers.
We have no contract with the Pope, we have no contract with King James, we have no contract with the United States or the State of Maryland or any other fictitious legal entities that exist on paper, and in recognizing this, we must recognize all those who purport to enforce the laws of these fictitious entities as war criminals without any authority over our liberty, our Souls and or our possessions.
Whereas, at the time of the defeat of our forefathers at Grenada in 1492, and the establishment of the rule of the Holy Roman Empire in Europe, and,
Whereas, In the Intera Cetera Divina bull of 1452, Pope Nicholas directed King Alfonso to "capture, vanquish, and subdue the saracens, pagans, and other enemies of Christ," to "put them into perpetual slavery," and "to take all their possessions and property.", and,
Whereas, the same US Supreme Court has recognized that:
"Congress can exercise no power by virtue of any supposed inherent sovereignty in the General Government. Indeed, it may be doubted whether the power can be correctly said to appertain to sovereignty in any proper sense as an attribute of an independent political community. The power to commit violence, perpetrate injustice, take private property by force without compensation to the owner, and compel the receipt of promises to pay in place of money, may be exercised, as it often has been, by irresponsible authority, but it cannot be considered as belonging to a government founded upon law. But be that as it may, there is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the Government of the United States." --Juilliard v. Greenman, (1884) 110 U.S. 421.;
Whereas; We, as a People are being brutalized and subjected to extrajudicial murder and other crimes being committed against us, under color of law, by those who have sworn an oath to "uphold and defend the Constitution". Genocidal polices that result in the aforementioned crimes, are enacted, executed and enforced by those in the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, who also have sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and yet it is these very individuals who are ultimately to be held accountable for committing Open Air Genocide against us as a people.
Whereas; The United States on its Federal, State, and Local levels of those who have sworn an oath to "uphold and defend the Constitution", each individual, who has done so, and who has allowed to continue the "Deprivations of Civil Rights Under Color of Law". The Department of Justice has reported extensively on Baltimore, Cleveland, Oakland, Ferguson, and other governmental subdivisions of the United States, under the "Authority, Control, and Power" of ALL of those individuals, who have sworn an oath to "uphold and defend the Constitution" are guilty of violating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. This is not very difficult to understand, this is not overly legalistic, it is a plain fact that exist at law, and most importantly within the jurisdiction of International Law, which the United States is signatory to.
Whereas; This goes far beyond Civil Rights and even "Human Rights", it goes to the very essence of our Divine Natural Right to stand as men and separate ourselves from a despotic class of individuals, all of whom, have sworn to "uphold and defend the Constitution", and who have written numerous reports of their deliberate and systematic policies to violate the very Constitution that they have all sworn to "uphold and defend".
Whereas; We Question: Where are “Black Lawyers for Justice” on this issue, are they not officers of the Courts who have sworn to "uphold and defend the Constitution"? How about Black Judges, Black Elected Officials? How about Black Commission Seat Holders? How about Black Central Committee Seat Holders? Black Election Board Seat Holders, Black Court Clerks? And; what about Blacks in Law Enforcement? And, Blacks in the Military?
Whereas; Now that you see what we're up against from those within our own race who have sworn an oath to "uphold and defend the constitution", but who go along with their superiors in subverting the Constitution and denying Justice to the victims of those their genocidal polices are destroying.
Whereas; The time has come for us to remove our plight from the jurisdiction of those who have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution to the United Nations, and charge the United States on the all of its levels of government with Genocide and the Destruction of Black People in North America. Citizenship cannot be forced on us; we cannot be forced into the jurisdiction of a governing class of outlaws, thieves and murderers.
Whereas;The time has come to Separate from those who are committing Genocide against us, and any Politician, Preacher, Entertainers, Lawyers, Athletes, Physicians, Professors, Historians, and Pundits, who disagree are complicit with the genocide.
Whereas; You all have an individual responsibility to disassociate from forced/ coerced citizenship and contact the International Community for assistance in charging all those who have sworn an oath to "uphold and defend the Constitution" with the crime of GENOCIDE and violations of the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide.
Whereas; There is no Divine or mortal authority which can validate the United States Supreme Court adoption of the so-called Vatican Doctrine of Discovery to the People or the land of America for the sole purpose of the continued implementation of slavery of the Aboriginal People of the earth, we the People of Tubman City must call our own conventions to free governance separate and independent from a government based in fraud, murder, theft and slavery.
©2017 David Anthony Wiggins©, All rights reserved

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *