Law concerning Rights and Privileges Using Maxims to define

Maxim (William C. Anderson's A Dictionary of Law, (1893), page 666): So called…because it's value is the highest and its authority the most reliable, and because it is accepted by all persons at the very highest. The principles and axioms of law, which are general propositions flowing from abstracted reason, and not accommodated to times or men, are wisely deposited in the breasts of the judges to be applied to such facts as come properly before them.

All of man's laws, except for many maxims of law, are commercial in nature. When a principle has been so long practiced and so universally acknowledged as to become a maxim, it is obligatory as part of the law. Ιf ever the law of God and man are at variance, the former are to be obeyed in derogation of the later, [Acts 5:29] because That which is against Divine Law is repugnant to society and is void.

Because man was given the LAW to benefit him the Law is held above all. For it to be given it had to be possessed by another, and only god existed before man, therefor god gave man law. Where the fact is present words are un-neccesary.

Every man is held under gods law and must be able to perform as such: for if it is impossible for it to be done there can be no law requiring it.

If A man, Travelling in his own vehicle, to perform what he considers a necessary task, uses the common public roads, and injures no one in the process how can he be charged with a crime under any reasoning processes of LAW? An Action is given to no man who hasn’t received damages, This includes an officer of the law bringing the action. IF that man is charged, by an officer, under laws governing commerce, while he is not engaged in commerce, and therefor by his own means not availed of the proceeds of commerce, currency, but the law requires a payment in currency for the violation, does that not process constitute the presumption that an impossible event MUST transpire before reconciliation can be proclaimed to have been performed, thus ending the controversy.
The Officers responsibility under the law would and should be to ascertain this before issuing a citation and bringing an action which starts from a fraud and thus remains a fraud to its death.
Clearly this simple scenario shows that while a man engaged in commerce can be charged and expected or required to comply with laws of commerce, by way of fine, and his possessing, at the least, the ability to procure the means in which to do so, is legal. While doing so to someone not engaged in commerce, being the opposite, is the opposite of legal, :thus it becomes an illegal process placed on a person. It cant be presumed or assumed that he can perform or provide a remedy acceptable under the law to reconcile the claim against him. Thus it is IMPOSSIBLE, and the law states that it requires nothing IMPOSSIBLE to be asked or to be expected to be performed as it goes against REASON.

Is it the presumption that because he pays for the gas in his vehicle that he can pay for the citation arising from his use of that vehicle? If so that presumption can only be allowed as a” fiction”, and that fiction ceases the moment the man proclaims, by oath or affirmation, his actions and intentions were not to harm, not to be criminal, and in full compliance with natural law, thus it rebuts the presumption and clearly proves his lack of assent which is necessary for an effective contract to be honored by the justice system and the underlying action is rendered void. Where truth is Fiction no longer exists.

The only REMEDY this man can have is court: Where A judge can perform proper assessment of all facts properly given by both claimant and defendant, and in a JURISTICTION lawfully established, pronounce judgement according to law.

Not his law, not a law that he prefers as its argued by a prosecutor, not one which benefits him or his employer, simply THE LAW.

If Adhering strictly to law the maxims below clearly state the conditions for how the law will be applied if its rightfully applied.

So lets start at the beginning as the “Old story goes” or as “The beaten path is the safe path” supports:
At the instant this man was pulled over, no damage having been claimed or suffered by the officer, no action could lawfully result.
If the judge looks past that to consider how every aspect or fact will contribute to the outcome, and with all those facts being brought to light rendering all fictions void how can he in good conscience continue? Consider that Any resulting charge would need to consider “did the mans actions clearly show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he was intending them to be criminal, or did his necessity give him the right to do what he did”.
When given the task of Adjudicating this scenario, a judge can consider facts.
The fact is that a judge may look to a statute that was designed as a law under which a thing acted, by a governing body, charged with creating and implementing those laws , under and per legal jurisdiction, and come to a conclusion. But a fact must be affirmed by a person under oath or by affidavit, or it is a Fiction, presumption assumption.
A judge MAY NOT claim to know the intention of any man acting on his own behalf and under his own conscience and beliefs, nor can a judge impose, as a matter of law, his beliefs on that person, in the absence of a clear law giving him jurisdiction to do so. When in court, a fact is established by sworn testimony under oath, it stands until disproven. A statute can not be placed under oath, and therefore may be relied upon only if unchallenged. Challenged it must fail, as do all other arguments which relied on it for their existence and must be so adjudicated based on the maxims of law.
In a claim of driving on a suspended license all manner of argument could arise but the simple beginning which must be addressed is when a license was obtained by the person was it their intent to be in constant with the law, or contrary to the law. If at the beginning the attempt was to comply with the law all resulting acts must be said to be in compliance with the law. Where the law has strayed is that through some administrative action or defect they have claimed that the license has become invalid, but they have never claimed how that process turned an otherwise stated legal action into a now stated criminal action, absent due process, and the necessary intent by the license holder, showing he intentially created an unresolved injury to a person for which the license holder is adjudicated, found guilty, and the injured party left un-reconciled. Absent that amazing set of circumstances no crime has been alleged to have been committed that would turn a legal intention into an illegal action under law.

The following numbered MAXIMS of law are given in support of the claim that the afformentioned “ CAN NOT” be done under LAW, and that any claims to the contrary need the backing and support of the maxims of law that defend that view. Because so many people have chosen, to be what they consider legal, when it comes to the use of our common public roads does not mean that it may be converted by public policy into a criminal action to use our common public roads against the will of one who asserts their rights under law as to such. If it is true and held by the courts that one who doesn’t state his rights has none and they chose to enjoy the benefits of that then they MUST under all maxims underlying intrinsic values accept that by taking the benefit of any law, the are bound to the disadvantages inherent in every law, and to argue against that is to argue against reason itself.

The order of things and laws:

GOD, MAN, LAW: first in time, first in line. The latter may not control the former. Man must serve and obey god, the law must serve and be obedient to man. No law can be said to have authority to compel a man to believe what he does not believe, and no authority given by law can allow a man to attest to the intentions of any other man, when that mans intentions are proclaimed, under oath, that they are his and his alone, in a court of law. The court being a construct of man. can only serve, it can never rule: thus, it may resolve disputes over damages however where intentions are involved the court holds no jurisdiction, only GOD may judge the intentions stated by that man, and on his behalf. That is why the JURISDICTION of the court is the first and foremost issue which must be decided prior to any action by the court against any man for any alleged crime and the guidelines as to jurisdiction of a court are so pronounced, narrowly defined that they ascribe to all the maxims of law, in one form or another, in an unambiguous manner, so that every man, is given the benefit of the law, that was given to him by god, as the only means in which he may live a life worthy of living that allows his neighbor the exact same ability.

1. An action is not given to him who has received no damages.
2.  No man ought to be burdened in consequence of another's act.
3. A personal injury does not receive satisfaction from a future course of proceeding.
4. Mistakes, neglect, or misconducts are not to be regarded as accidents.
5. No one is obliged to accept a benefit against his consent.
6.  He who receives the benefit should also bear the disadvantage.
7.  He who derives a benefit from a thing, ought to feel the disadvantages attending it.
8.  He who enjoys the benefit, ought also to bear the burden.
9.  He who enjoys the advantage of a right takes the accompanying disadvantage.
10.  One who avails himself of the benefits conferred by statute cannot deny its validity.
11.  What I approve I do not reject. I cannot approve and reject at the same time. I cannot take the benefit of an instrument, and at the same time repudiate it.
12.  One is not present unless he understands.
13.  It avails little to know what ought to be done, if you do not know how it is to be done.
14.  He who questions well, learns well.
15.  What ever is done in excess is prohibited by law.
16.  No one is bound to give information about things he is ignorant of, but every one is bound to know that which he gives information about.
17.  Consent makes the law. A contract is a law between the parties, which can acquire force only by consent.
18.  Consent makes the law: the terms of a contract, lawful in its purpose, constitute the law as between the parties.
19. The contract makes the law.
20.  nything is due to a corporation, it is not due to the individual members of it, nor do the members individually owe what the corporation owes.
21.  Agreement takes the place of the law: the express understanding of parties supercedes such understanding as the law would imply.
22.  Manner and agreement overrule the law.
23.  The essence of a contract being assent, there is no contract where assent is wanting.
24.  He who does not deny, admits. [A well-known rule of pleading]
25.  No one is believed in court but upon his oath.
26.  In law none is credited unless he is sworn. All the facts must, when established by witnesses, be under oath or affirmation.
27.  An act of the court shall oppress no one.
28.  He who does not forbid a crime while he may, sanctions it.
29.  He who does not blame, approves.
30.  No guilt attaches to him who is compelled to obey.
31.  Gross negligence is held equivalent to intentional wrong.
32.  Misconduct binds its own authors. It is a never-failing axiom that everyone is accountable only for his own offence or wrong.
33.  In offenses, the will and not the consequences are to be looked to.
34.  It is to the intention that all law applies.
35.  The intention of the party is the soul of the instrument.
36.  Every act is to be estimated by the intention of the doer.
37.  An act does not make a man a criminal, unless his intention be criminal.
38.  An act does not make a person guilty, unless the intention be also guilty. This maxim applies only to criminal cases; in civil matters it is otherwise.
39.  In offenses, the intention is regarded, not the event.
40.  The intention amounts to nothing unless some effect follows.
41.  Take away the will, and every action will be indifferent.
42.  Your motive gives a name to your act.
43. Punishment is due if the words of an oath be false.
44.  Punishment ought not to precede a crime.
45.  If one falsely accuses another of a crime, the punishment due to that crime should be inflicted upon the perjured informer. [Deuteronomy 19:18]
46. Where two rights concur, the more ancient shall be preferred.
47. In ambiguous expressions, the intention of the person using them is chiefly to be regarded.
48. Words are indicators of the mind or thought.
49.  A fiction is a rule of law that assumes something which is or may be false as true.
50.  Where truth is, fiction of law does not exist.
51.  There is no fiction without law.
52.  Fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions
53. Out of fraud no action arises.
54.  He who does not prevent what he can, seems to commit the thing.
55.  He who does not prevent what he can prevent, is viewed as assenting.
56.  Gross negligence is equivalent to fraud.
57.  Once a fraud, always a fraud.
58.  What otherwise is good and just, if it be sought by force and fraud, becomes bad and unjust.
59.  Earlier in time, is stronger in right. First in time, first in right.
60.  He who is before in time, is preferred in right.
61.  What is first is truest; and what comes first in time, is best in law.
62.  The order of things is confounded if every one preserves not his jurisdiction [in and of Christ].
63.  Jurisdiction is a power introduced for the public good, on account of the necessity of dispensing justice.
64.  Every jurisdiction has its own bounds.
65.  The government cannot confer a favor which occasions injury and loss to others.
66.  The government is to be subject to the law, for the law makes government.
67.  The law is not to be violated by those in government.
68.  If you judge, understand.
69.  It is the duty of a good judge to remove the cause of litigation. [Acts 18:12-16]
70.  To a judge who exceeds his office or jurisdiction no obedience is due.
71.  One who exercises jurisdiction out of his territory is not obeyed with impunity.
72.  A twisting of language is unworthy of a judge.
73.  A good judge decides according to justice and right, and prefers equity to strict law.
74.  That law is the best which leaves the least discretion to the judge; and this is an advantage which results from certainty.
75.  He is the best judge who relies as little as possible on his own discretion.
76.  Whenever there is a doubt between liberty and slavery, the decision must be in favor of liberty.
77.  He who decides anything, a party being unheard, though he should decide right, does wrong.
78.  He who spares the guilty, punishes the innocent. [Mark 15:6-15, Luke 23:17-25, John 18:38-40]
79.  The judge is condemned when a guilty person escapes punishment.
80.  What appears not does not exist, and nothing appears judicially before judgment.
81.  It is improper to pass an opinion on any part of a sentence, without examining the whole.
82.  No one should be judge in his own cause.
83.  No one can be at once judge and party.
84.  A judge is to expound, not to make, the law.
85.  It is the duty of a judge to declare the law, not to enact the law or make it.
86.  A maxim is so called because its dignity is chiefest, and its authority most certain, and because universally approved of all.
87.  All law has either been derived from the consent of the people, established by necessity, confirmed by custom, or of Divine Providence.
88.  Nothing is so becoming to authority [God] as to live according to the law [of God].
89.  He acts prudently who obeys the commands of the Law. [Ecclesiastes 12:13]
90.  Law is the safest helmet; under the shield of the law no one is deceived. [Ephesians 6:13-17, 1 Thessalonians 5:8]
91.  An argument drawn from authority [scripture] is the strongest in law.
92.  The law does not seek to compel a man to do that which he cannot possibly perform.
93.  The law requires nothing impossible.
94.  The law compels no one to do anything which is useless or impossible.
95.  No one is bound to do what is impossible
96.  Impossibility excuses the law.
97.  No prescription runs against a person unable to act.
98.  The law shall not, through the medium of its executive capacity, work a wrong.
99.  The law does wrong to no one.
100.  An act of the law wrongs no man.
101.  The law never works an injury, or does him a wrong.
102. aw is established for the benefit of man. [Mark 2:27]
103. We may do what is allowed by law.
104.  n a deed which may be considered good or bad, the law looks more to the good than to the bad.
105.  In things favored what does good is more regarded than what does harm.
106.  In default of the law, the maxim rules.
107.  Human laws are born, live and die.
108.  It is a perpetual law that no human or positive law can be perpetual.
109.  Everything is permitted, which is not forbidden by law.
110.  All rules of law are liable to exceptions. [Matthew 12:1-5]
111.  What is inconvenient or contrary to reason, is not allowed in law.
112.  The laws serve the vigilant, not those who sleep upon their rights.
113.  egal remedies are for the active and vigilant.
114.  What is good and equal, is the law of laws.
115.  The civil law is what a people establishes for itself. [It is not established by God]
116.  Many things have been introduced into the common law, with a view to the public good, which are inconsistent with sound reason. [The law of merchants was merged with the common law]
117.  Necessity overrules the law.
118.  Necessity makes that lawful which otherwise is not lawful.
119. The immediate, and not the remote cause, is to be considered.
120.  Where there is a right, there is a remedy.
121.  For every legal right the law provides a remedy.
122.  He who uses the right of another [belonging to Christ] ought to use the same right [of Christ]. [In other words, don't use something new, or something outside of Christ].
123.  Liberty is an inestimable good.
124.  All shall have liberty to renounce those things which have been established in their favor.
125. Power ought to follow, not to precede justice.
126.  To refer errors to their origin is to refute them.
127.  The origin of a thing ought to be inquired into.
128.  Ignorance of the Law does not excuse misconduct in anyone, least of all a sworn officer of the law.
129.  Summonses or citations should not be granted before it is expressed under the circumstances whether the summons ought to be made.
130.  A delegated power cannot be again delegated. A deputy cannot appoint a deputy.
131.  An office ought to be injurious to no one.
132.  The greatest enemies to peace are force and wrong.
133.  Force and wrong are greatly contrary to peace.
134.  Force is inimical to the laws.
135. What is mine cannot be taken away without my consent.
136.  Every person has exclusive dominion over the soil which he absolutely owns; hence such an owner of land has the exclusive right of hunting and fishing on his land, and the waters covering it.
137.  Every man's house is his castle.
138.  A citizen cannot be taken by force from his house to be conducted before a judge or to prison.
139.  The habitation of each one is an inviolable asylum for him.
140.  Whatever is affixed to the soil belongs to it.
141.  Rivers and ports are public, therefore the right of fishing there is common to all.
142.  Land comprehends any ground soil, or earth whatsoever; as meadows, pastures, woods, moors, waters, and marshes.
143.  A right cannot arise from a wrong.
144.  You are not to do evil that good may come of it.
145.  It is not lawful to do evil that good may come of it.
146.  No man ought to derive any benefit of his own wrong.
147.  No one ought to gain by another's loss.
148.  No one ought to enrich himself at the expense of others.
149.  Concealment of the truth is (equivalent to) a statement of what is false.
150.  Suppression of fact, which should be disclosed, is the same in effect as willful misrepresentation.
151.  Evil is not presumed.
152.  It is safer to err on the side of mercy.
153.  Whatever is acquired by the servant, is acquired for the master.
154.  A slave is not a person.
155.  A slave, and everything a slave has, belongs to his master.
156. The master is liable for injury done by his servant.
157.  External acts indicate undisclosed thoughts.
158.  External actions show internal secrets.
159.  Outward acts evince the inward purpose.
160. Remove the cause and the effect will cease.
161. A witness is a person who is present at and observes a transaction. [The government only has over persons, not substance. Any video tape, audio tape, computer printout, etc. that are used as witnesses
162.  In law, none is credited unless he is sworn. All facts must, when established by witnesses, be under oath or affirmation.
163.  A confession made in court is of greater effect than any proof.
164. Deliberate falsehood in one matter will be imputed to related matters.
165. He who alleges contradictory things is not to be listened to.
166.  All things are presumed to be lawfully done and duly performed until the contrary is proved.
167.  When the plaintiff does not prove his case, the defendant is absolved.
168.  When opinions are equal, a defendant is acquitted.
169.  The faculty or right of offering proof is not to be narrowed.
170. No one is bound to inform about a thing he knows not, but he who gives information is bound to know what he says.
171. Plain truths need not be proved.
172. An eye witness outweighs others.
173.  The claimant is always bound to prove: the burden of proof lies on him.
174.  Upon the one alleging, not upon him denying, rests the duty of proving.
175.  Upon the plaintiff rests the proving – the burden of proof.
176.  The necessity of proving lies with him who makes the charge.
177. Facts are more powerful than words.
178. Better is the condition of the defendant, than that of the plaintiff.
179. Better is the condition of the defendant, than that of the plaintiff.
180. When the proofs of facts are present, what need is there of words.