OCR Text |
Show rf Page 10 : i . ui ii I The Utah Independent November 15, 1973 Jean filed a $3,060,000 (Three Million, Sixty Thousand Dollar) suit October 12, 1973, in the Third District Court for Salt Lake County in Salt Lake City, Utah. Named in the suit were Aldon J. Anderson, Federal District Judge; C. Nelson Day, United States Attorney; and James M. Dunn, Assistant United States Attorney. Mr. Smith claims that Anderson, Day and Dunn have violated his right to defend his wife and the right of his wife to have Counsel of her choice in an action pending in Federal District Court involving the withholding provisions of the income tax laws. In that case Smith had been chosen by his wife to represent her and had submitted motions before the Court in his wife's behalf. Dunn, acting under the direction of Day, objected on the grounds that Smith was not a licensed attorney and could not represent his wife and the motions had been illegally submitted,. Anderson then ruled that Smith could not represent his wife and ordered the motions be struck from the record. Smith contends that Andersoni Day, and Dunn have conspired to deny him and his wife of rights secured by the Federal Constitution under the First Amendment. Fifth Amendment, and Sixth Amendment. He also contends that Anderson. Day. and Dunn have conspired to deprive them of rights secured under the Utah State Constitution in Article I. Sections 1,7. 12. and 13. Smith contends that the lawyers and judges have violated Article IV, Section 26, Paragraph 16 of the Utah State Constitution by setting up the Bar Association and granting them exclusive franchise to represent other people. Smith quoted that section of the Utah State Constitution as saying The Legislature is prohibited from enacting any private or special laws in the following cases: Granting to an individual, association or corporation any privilege, immunity or franchise. The Smiths said that the lawyers and judges have set up a monopoly and are using that monopoly to trample upon the rights of the individual while they bilk them of their money at the same time. They said, We have decided to take issue with them and show the Public what the lawyers and judges have done to this country in an effort to try to rectify the situation. We would hope that all patriotic citizens would join with us and sue every public official who violates his public trust and oath of office. This is the only way to make public officials responsible to the Public. The Smiths contend that when any public official violates the rights of the individual they are not protected by their position and could and should be sued. Smith said that they were suing Anderson, Day and Dunn, not as public officials, but as private citizens, that public officials. lose their immunity from prosecution when violate the they individual, and they are liable under Title 42 of the United States Code. When asked what their chances for winning the suit were. Smith remained noncommittal. He said, We realize that we are bucking the system and we know that the system will try to protect itself even to the extent of denying us our rights under the Constitution. We dont know how far we will get because we are asking the very Gadianton Society plundering us to secure for us our rights." The Smiths live at 335 East 1950 South, Bountiful, Utah. Continued from page 7 ry e US Its not just the matter of anyw here, and none of your friends or family or neighbors would ever know what happened to you. This is a Gestapo type of and not compatible with the American Constitutional concept of fairness and justice. It would become a convenient way of getting rid of political enemies, and no doubt thousands of Patriots would soon be incarcerated in the concentration camps, since l am sure the jails would not hold them all. presume that our politically contrived food and fuel shortages would provide the excuse to put all of these political prisoners to work in American Sibcriasturningout ease the food and fiber to I We should resist all efforts to do with County Government and County Officials elected by the away people. LEAST-FAVORED-NATIO- N most-favored-nati- status for on over-inflat- over-regulat- ed foundations of our freedoms. ed Stand IfCDV successful results. Uniform and Tenant Act Residential Landlord This Act, prepared by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, was drafted to simplify, clarify, modernize and revise the law of governing the rental of dwelling units and the rights and obligations and tenants landlords landlords. Another purpose of the Act is to encourage to maintain and improve the quality of housing. The Act applies to, regulates and determines rights, obligations, and remedies under a rental agreement, wherever made, for dwelling units located within a state. Certain specified arrangements are excluded from coverage under the Act. It provides for both landlord and tenant remedies and also prohibits certain provisions In rental state agreements. Jurisdiction over a landlord who is not a resident of theSecreor the a of is provided for by service designated agent process upon -- tary of State. Uniform Duties To Disabled Persons Act This Act, prepared by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, is to provide for a minimum level of dutya toward persons in a unconscious state and to conscious persons unable to communicate the existence of a condition requiring special treatment. These groups of persons are collectively referred to as disabled persons. Duties are prescribed for three categories of persons who may come into- contact with a disabled person: law enforcement officers, medical personnel and all others. The Act - provides for identifying devices to be worn by certain disabled persons and falsifying Identification or misrepresenting a condition a criminal offense. makes i State Employment Discrimination Legislation was offered by the Equal Employment OppoIt suggests that states may enact the Model Act approved by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, which, if enacted, would allow certain cases in- This suggested rtunity Commission. legislation Anti-Discrimina- tion volving discrimination complaints to be handled by state agencies rather than having to be handled by the Federal Government. Workman's Compensation Laws This is a statement of recent and continuing activity of the Council of State Governments to assist the States in modernizing workmen's compensation laws. Flood Hazard Area Regulation This statement calls attention to a two volume publication of the United States Water Resources Council on Regulation of Flood Hazard Areas To Reduce Flood Losses. Automobile Insurance No-Fa- ult statement reviews the work of the Advisory Committee on Automobile Accident Claims of the Council of State Governments. It also cites the availability of other source material on this subject. Most of us will take a stand to save our homes and property; others will react instantly against economy choking business practices. Responsible citizens in this age seek to prevent bondage of their state and their country in a world government of controlled national states. Each one of the suggested acts for 1 974 appears to have a goal of protecting the people in a given area, and yet a careful study of the act will reveal a restriction of the rights of the people, or a grant of complete power in some specific area to government. An example: The Constitution plainly says, in Article 1 of the Amendments: Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to peaceably assemble. The uniform public assembly act act calls for a permit system, before holding a public assembly. The permit officer must approve of the time, the place, and manner of conducting the assembly as appropriate to protect the If he concludes the above are rights of unsatisfactory, he is directed to take it to court. What man or government can give, they can also take The Constitution guarantees us the right to away. peaceably assemble. Why any law to take away this inspired and inalienable right? This years37 Silken Cords are not to guarantee freedom; they are added to the previous years to bind down and destroy all semblance of freedom arid liberty in this great country. This kind of legislation is not required of the various state legislatures, but the pressure will be on from many directions urging, pleading, persuading and forcing, with all the power the Federal and State bureaucracies can use tic each state down to where we arc controlled from Washington, or the United Nations. The Council of State Governments will have ready for non-participan- shortages. the Soviets and Red Chinese; so much as why we are always being given least- - favored nation treatment by our government, for everything and everybody else, as were over-taxe- d into into shortages of everything, out of our freedoms of choices, and insecurity, overlooked in the basics of Americanism which are the over-controll- ed A A Continued from page 9 use or safety and to minimize or avoid substantial impairment of the normal likelihof a public place, or (2) if he concludes that there is a reasonable: and health ood that a public assembly will substantially harm the public of. conditions on t e safety and this cannot be avoided by the impositioncourt for the appropriate permit, then he is directed to take the matter to orders. The Act attempts to maximize the possibilities that discussions and with negotiations will occur between sponsors and governmental authorities ts. -- GIVING WASHINGTON TREATMENT I A Legality of Sheriff unit of government. Our Idaho Constitution also authorizes the Sheriff to be in charge of the Posse Comitatus, which means that if he needs help in defending the local jurisdiction, or in enforcing lawful precepts, he may call upon all of the men of the County to assist him. In fact there is a severe penalty for anyone w ho refuses to help the Sheriff when called upon. This is the kind of local law enforcement that would solve todays problems in this field, if it were being fully utilized. Subversive elements in our society are urging a cross-counttype of law enforcement, which would be both dangerous and unconstitutional (Amendment VI must have trial in same district that crime is committed). It would be dangerous in that a policeman from New York or California, for instance, could come into your home, arrest you. take you AP TMP Smith Sues Judge Anderson James B. Smith and his wife The Paper That Dares To Take il Continued on page 11 |