From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: 1913 Income Tax Amendment
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 03:46:25 GMT

charest@Aig.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Len Charest) writes:
>	This sounds *very* interesting. Could you please provide more
>	information, especially on who/what is this group that's
>	carrying out the research.

This was posted a while back by someone on the net.  I don't have the
attribution, as my original file got trashed along with some other
valuable stuff, this is from a reply :(.


------------------------- Start Quote -----------------------------

Some of you have wondered if there was really anything to the idea
that the 16th amendment was improperly ratified. The answer can be
found in the official documents. An example can be found in "Financial
Survival", issue #1, 1990. Contained within is a reproduction of pages
486 & 487 of the "Journal of the Regular Session of the Senate of the
Commonwealth of Kentucky", February 8, 1910.
 
The following is a direct quote from this document:
 
WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States on July __, 1909,
     adopted a joint resolution, proposing an amendment to the consti-
     tution of the United States, as follows:
 
     Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
U.S.A., in Congress assembled, two thirds of each House concurring
therein, that, the following article is proposed as an amendment to the
constitution of the United States, which, when ratified by the Legis-
latures of three-fourths of the several States, shall be valid to all
intents and purposes, as a part of the constitution:
 
     Article XVI.    The Congress shall have power to lay and col-
lect taxes on incomes from whatever sources derived, without ap-
portionment among the several States, and without regard to any
census or enumeration.   And the forgoing proposed amendment
having been laid before the Legislature of the State of Kentucky
for consideration and action:
 
     Now Therefore, be it resolved by the General Assembly of the
Commonwealth of Kentucky:   That the forgoing amendment to the
constitution of the United States be, and the same is hearby ratified
to all intents and purposes, as a part of the constitution of the United
States.
 
     2. That the Governor of this State is hereby requested to forward
to the President of the United States an authentic copy of the fore-
going joint resolution.
 
     And the question being taken upon the concurring in the adoption
     of said Resolution, it was decided in the affirmative.
 
     The yeas and nays being required thereon were as follows, vis:
 
          Those who voted in the affirmative were-
 
Beard, P. J.,              Brown, R. B.,                  Hubble, R. L.,
Bertram, E.,               Graham, J. C.,                 Mathers, Dr. C. W.,
Brown, Gus,                Hogg, E. E.,                   Vice, John L.,
                                                                        -9
          Those who voted in the negative were-
 
Arnet, B. M.,              Linn, Conn,                    Smith, J. T.,
Arnet, L. W.,              Nagle, Chas. W.,               Taylor, E. M.,
Cattlet, J. R.,            Newcomb, H. D.,                Taylor, G. A.,
Chipman, N. B.,            Oliver, A. J.,                 Thomas, Claude M.,
Combs, Thos. A.,           Ryan, Mark,                    Tichenor, Dr. B. F.,
Cureton, Nat C.,           Salmon, R. M.,                 Watkins, J. J.,
Dowling, W. E.,            Smith, Hilliard,               Wyatt, G. T.,
Grigsby, B. C.,                                                        -22
 
End of quote
 
Quoting further the text from "Financial Survival":
 
 The State of Kentucky is listed in Senate Document 240 (71st
Congress,3rd Session, 1931) as having been one of the states that
ratified the 16th amendment. The obvious fraud shown on the documents
(on this page) is probably one of the more blatant examples
discovered.
 The official Journal of the Kentucky Senate for February 8, 1910
records that 9 Senators voted FOR ratification, and 22 voted AGAINST.
The Journal states "it was decided in the affirmative". Only in the
dream world of politics can 9 be considered greater than 22! How many
more lies are to be found in our "laws" and official statistics?
 
 Research into the ratification of the 16th Amendment was initiated in
the early 1980's by a group known as the "Montana Historians". Various
errors were uncovered in the ratification records of several states.
In order to determine once and for all whether the 16th Amendment was
indeed a legally ratified amendment, Mr. Red Beckman and Mr. Bill
Benson realized that each of the states would have to be visited and
their official documents researched. In 1984, Bill Benson traveled to
all 48 contiguous states and the Capitol in Washington, D. C., and
thoroughly researched and documented the full ratification process. He
copied and certified thousands of documents, compiling the most
complete record of the ratification of this amendment in existence.
 
 These documents were distilled into a comprehensive book on the
subject entitled "The Law That Never Was". This book is a must reading
for attorneys, judges, legislators, constitutional research groups,
citizens rights organizations, and anyone interested in verifying for
themselves the fraud of the 16 Amendment.
 
'I dug up memorandums of the Solicitor of the Department of State
under Philander Knox, including the one referred to as "The Golden
Key". These memorandums show the completely specious arguments which
Knox used as justification for glossing over fatal flaws which the
Solicitor admitted were contained in the copies of the ratification
action of 34 of 38 States claimed by the secretary as having
ratified...Knox proclaimed the 16th Amendment ratified anyway when he
could not help but know that such a proclamation was totally false.'
 
End of quote
 
 
For a copy of the book "The Law That Never Was", write to:
 
Constitutional Research Associates
P.O. Box 550
So. Holland, IL. 60473
 
For a copy of "Financial Survival", write to:
 
National Citizen Education
9205 S.E. Clackamas Rd., Suite 435
Clackamas, OR. 97015
 
I hope this satisfys those who wanted some proof to back up the statements
made in this newgroup.

--------------------------- end quote ------------------------

However, don't try anything with this, it's already been tested in
court... the judges are just as dependent on their shares of the swag
as the rest of government.  Essentially, since the congress declared
it ratified, we're supposed to act as if it's ratified.
-- 
One thing leads to another, and usually does.