Servant Of The Light.

Affidavit of Allodium Claim

Affiant is (Initial and surname)__________,

Date______________,

Affidavit number 1#

Working as a tangible man/woman

to exist under the natural law of the land,

of (contactable address),

in the City of __________,

British Isles

Notary is (Initial and surname)__________,

of (contactable address),

in the City of __________,

British Isles

1. All Rights Reserved, Without Prejudice UCC  1-308

I MAKE OATH, I DO SOLEMNLY, SINCERELY AND TRULY DECLARE AND AFFIRM AND SAY THAT:

2. If anyone wishes to challenge any statement within this affidavit of claim, it is given to all parties who presume a ‘right of use’ of the stated land claim for their acquiescence or rebuttal, silence is taken as agreement, by not replying to this notice you agree to its terms and statements of fact, and the land here claimed by the named allodarii is held as un-rebutted and a lawful indefeasible claim, so expunging all other weaker claims upon the period of 40 days from the above date, 7 days is a minimum period of rebuttal, so all reasonable efforts of equity are granted through this extended term, this period allows all interested parties the time to rebut this lawful sworn claim to produce evidence of interest in the land claim that is lawful that rebuts the facts here stated, this notice to all agents is notice to principal. After the period of 40 days, if no truthful, reasoned rebuttal based upon fact and law is evident, the named allodarii will have a clear lawful un-rebutted claim, and seek to have all claims upon this detailed right of use removed from any register, taking away, expunging and exposing all presumptions of jurisdiction from any and all incorporeal entities of government, state, corporation or trust. This is not a usufructuary claim, being the right of enjoying all the advantages derivable from the use of something that belongs to another, but an exclusive claim of use, within an allodial right of claim, within the natural prescriptive law of the land.

3. Details of claim including all metes and bounds, with exhibit of map reference and co-ordinates (attached) _______________________

This claim will be posted in clear view on (date) for public inspection on the claimed land for 40 days, it is published in a newspaper local to the claim for 21 days from (date), and it has the witnessed and signed consent of those who neighbour the claim.

Affidavit within historical context

4. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes the words of Frederic Bastiat "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."

5.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that in 1066 William the Bastard invaded with a group of mercenaries, outlaws and mindless slaves, under the direction of the Pope. “After the Norman invasion in 1066, a rigorous feudal structure was imposed upon the country. Central to it was the notion, still true to this day, that all the land belonged to the Crown. - This process led to the formation of a feudal pyramid.”(An Introduction to the History of Land Law 1961 Ch. 1)

6. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that after 20 years of murder, rape, pillage and starvation of the indigenous population, William the Bastard held the land of Britannia in despotic dominion. This despot imposed the abuse of government, in opposition to the natural prescriptive law, where the sovereign has undivided power and all are compelled through the force of arms into subjugation to that instituted authority, imposed as unaccountable tyranny in the hands of a single man, evolving in its modern carnation into a corporation, which functions as the granting legislative umbrella of its incorporated institutions.

7.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the despotic dominion inherent in the unlawful invention of ownership founded in Britannia in record through the dooms day book of 1086, establishes all in ownership, meaning control; holding to account the land, the resources of the land and the people upon the land; control means a duplicate account, allowing those holding a duplicate account to share gains from those who generate the wealth from the land, resources and people.

8.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that ownership is a relationship in which those using the land are only “keepers”, “tenants”, “colonists”, “holders”, ‘leaseholder’, ‘renter’; imposing a belief all gains must be shared with the duplicate owners.

9.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that all “paper” owner’s title of tenancy of estate is based within legislation upon the positive law, and so held only in the colour of law.( The colour of law denotes the "mere semblance of ‘legal’(corporate) right", the "pretence or appearance of" lawful right). I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that only a tangible living man or woman can have a prescriptive lawful claim of right to use the land.

The Basis of Ownership

10.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that William the Bastard claimed dominion and granted tenancy on land to his supporters, which made them landlords, land barons and eventually landed gentry, a grant based within the genocide of those who lived upon the lands previously, or the physical enslavement of those who survived that carefully planned genocide, instigated by Pope Alexander II and executed through his agents lead by Guillaume le Bâtard (William the Bastard).

11.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that William granted title – an appellation indoctrinated as a delusion of dignity or distinction, giving the outward evidence (evidence is not fact until submitted to be decided) of a right, rather than the mere right itself.

12.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the landlords made others tenant under themselves in the same sub-feudalisation, with some of their land held in Demesne or dominicum (the Lords), with those indigenous serfs incumbent, working it as slaves–Demesne being lands of a manor not granted out in tenancy, but reserved by the lord for his own use. Not in every sense the opposite of the landlord’s tenemental lands as the lord is tenant of the crown, and the Crown of the Church.

13.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the basis of ownership is in the natural law, which states you can only own what you create yourself; the fruits of your own labours. The Church claims, the ‘Creator’ of the earth, the resources of the earth, and mankind is ‘God’, God had a son, Jesus, a ‘man God’ on earth, the Pope is the substitute of Jesus, Jesus is God, God is the Creator, therefore the Pope is the owner of the earth, all other claims are sub-feudalisations of that premise, this is stated for example in the ‘Treaty of Verona October 3^rd 1213’.

14.  I am not in receipt of any factual document or proof which refutes that no man can be a God. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the Church controls its chattel through the City of London: as stated  (Borough Customs, Selden Society, Vols. 18 and 21(1904-6) Mary Bateson, And British Borough Charters, 1216-1307 (1923) A. Ballard and J. Tait) “A justice, whomsoever they please from among themselves, to keep the pleas of my (the Popes) crown and try them, and no other man is to be justice over the said men of London. And the citizens (of the City) shall not be impleaded (sued in a court of law) in any plea outside the walls of the city......And with regard to lands......I will on their behalf maintain justice according to the law of the city.”

Force of Arms

15.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the force of arms was used for the delivery and possession of the indigenous peoples lands to the despotic King’s tenants ‘in capite’ (‘in the head’ – within the mind of the man acting, authority is granted for their actions by a person or institution they perceive superior to themselves and all others, allowing them to hold a belief that they can act criminally without accountability, or suffer encroachment with a belief they may not seek remedy) or tenants by knights service (tenure in chivalry is the same as knights service). Tenure in Chivalry, were military tenants.

16.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the seizing of the lawful property of another by force of arms is the very definition of armed robbery, or that this form of thievery makes void all claims of grant by the beneficiaries of that criminal action. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that there is any limitation of action for felonies, being any crime punishable by death or mutilation and forfeiture of criminally held lands and goods.

17.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that tenure is the system of holding lands or tenements in subordination to some superior; Tenure is the direct result of feudalism, which separated the ‘dominium directum’ (the dominion of a right line) the right to use and profit in the soil, which is placed mediately or immediately in the Crown, from the ‘dominion utile’ (dominion of profit) designated by the term ‘seisin’. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the impositions of ownership being used to hide the prescriptive law system of an allodial right of use, can be used (prescriptive) lawfully to prevent a living man establishing allodium claim on any property held within a fictional instrument.

18. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that seisin is the completion of the feudal investiture in which the tenant was admitted into the feud, and performed the right of homage and fealty. Further I am not in receipt of any factual document that refutes the feud in its common use is a conflict that could be argued is with freedom, and equity, but especially with the natural duty of care each man or woman has for their neighbour.

19.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that feud: is a word that has a duel meaning, of contention or chattel, which originates from feoh ‘money, property, cattle’, and is the same as ‘feod’ – ‘feodum’ – ‘feudum’ – ‘fief’ – ‘fee’ and is in contradistinction to ‘Allodium’ (which means a man’s rightful land; as in ‘all property rights within that concept’). I further am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes all land and resources of the land are held within the natural allodial system. Or that feud is land that is held by force of arms (contention), as feudal land, this is complimented with its duel meaning of fee (fee means held in inheritance, being the ‘estate’ of the dead) – fee also has a duel meaning, a charge for the privilege of estate as tenant as an annual payment, and a tenancy of estate that can be passed on to an inheritor.

20.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that a privilege (unlawful advantage) being particular or peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by the holder of the privilege beyond the common advantage of other citizens. Nor am I in receipt of any factual document which refutes that a citizen is a member of a corporate city ship, an incorporated town or borough which is floating upon the ‘See’ (episcopalis sedes) of a Bishops diocese, as it is municipal, meaning that which belongs to a corporation, created from and as an incorporated charters of the Crown corporation.

21.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that William the Bastard after 1086, held the common people, that were not slaughtered, insolvent and in poverty, and so a legal system of oppression was imposed upon the natural law to function in bankruptcy. Nor am I in receipt of any factual document which refutes William brought with him the Jews of Europe who established a refined system of commercial law based upon the removal of allodial claim and the imposition of the usury system of ownership: their own form of commerce and a system of rules to facilitate and govern it. These rules made their way into the developing structure of English Law. Several elements of historical Jewish legal practice have been integrated into the English legal system. Notable among these is the written credit agreement - shetar, or starr, as it appears in English documents. The basis of the shetar, or "Jewish Gage"or mortgage (meaning- death pledge) was a lien on all property. The Law Merchant which is the basis of the modern system of admiralty law and the laws of negotiable paper (instruments), bankruptcy, insurance, and of sales removed the protection of the natural law and established legislation through presumptions, which were seldom if ever rebutted exposing their fraudulence.

22. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the Roman Catholic knights Templar (Knights of the Military Order of the Temple of Solomon) established the Temple bar; initially constructing a building on what is now Chancery Lane, a round church patterned on the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. An inscription on the Round recorded that it was consecrated by the Patriarch Heraclius on 10 February 1185. The Church through the Templar’s imposed Roman law (the State is God) to maintain the law merchant.

23.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that in 1215 the Magna Cater was imposed upon the Despot John, by the Roman Catholic church, through Stephen Langton the archbishop of Canterbury, to hold the Monarch to the Law Merchant, but more notably if the monarch was accountable to contract law, it would hold John and his descendents to the imposed contract of ownership the Church held, established through forcing John, with the threat of the force of arms, being a massive military force, organised by the Church, readied in France to invade Britannia to force John to transfer his despotic claim of ownership, from the monarch to the Church, for which he was ultimately murdered with poison by the agents of the Church, to make certain the contract was not dissolved.

24.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that this imposed legal system was further developed with Maritime Law (international law of war and commerce) ultimately combined and known today as the Uniform Commercial Code applied within a trust structure binding only upon the trustees of corporate government, all invented and imposed through un-rebutted presumptions to prevent men and women from gaining the protection of the true inalienable Natural prescriptive Law of the land, and the immutable protection each for the other of a duty of care, by subversively hiding the truth with un-rebutted presumptions of law and fact. The instigators of these deceptions upon the law claim time immemorial ends on the accession of Richard I in 1189, in an attempt to hold these impositions in place by discouraging the investigation of the law before the legislative system.

25. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that time immemorial means extending back beyond memory, record, or knowledge, records exist far earlier than 1189, time immemorial encompasses the natural law as the basis of all law, I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that legislation is based in positive law, being imposed law of the slave, which is in contrast to the prescriptive law of the land which remains inalienable and immutable. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the legislative system cannot claim to exist further back than the installation of the Temple Bar in its present carnation; and that those who are acting as trustees in function of the corporation, who is the issuer of the legislation, are bound by its impositions if they consent to that encroachment, in that respect time immemorial is indeed 1189.

Rex

26.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that from 449 immigrants from Germany, the Angles and the Saxons, invaded Southern Britannia establishing small Kingdoms, from which they attacked their neighbours to plunder, rape and murder, to exist from the theft of the fruits of others within a usury culture (page 1119 Blacks Law Dictionary: Usury is a certain benefit which is received for the use of the thing lent, and is not lawful), as is the Christian creed even to this day, this is attested by their own chronicles. By the arrival of William the Bastard these immigrants had been pushed to the coast by the indigenous people with the help of the Danes. England was known as Albien which meant ‘the surface of the earth’, in prescriptive natural law no collective rights exist therefore no nation, country or state exists as they impose upon the rights of man; the German Immigrants called the indigenous people the border people, ‘Mercians’, those who bordered their despotic dominions of regional Kingdoms.

27. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that before William the Bastard, excluding the despotic dominion of the southern Kingdoms, a Rex was not a king, but an aspect of the natural law system, akin to the modern Sheriff of the Court; the word ‘Rex’ was most likely incorporated into Latin as some time in history to deceive, however across Europe the Greek alphabet was used much like the English alphabet is used today to write many languages, what is propagated as Latin written before 1066 by the indigenous peoples was simply an expression of the Albien Celtic language utilising that alphabet. Men aided a Rex voluntarily. A Rex had to offer battle gear, food, and spoils ("armor stripped from an enemy, booty;" originally "skin stripped from a killed animal,") to get others to follow him into battle, more importantly, they volunteered to champion the cause of the weak -- for a fee, (as free living men cannot be lawfully bound with any invention of sovereign, and under natural law of the land, no sovereign or state can exist to compel; as all men and women in sight of the law of the land are created equal in dignity, privilege, benefit, nobility, value; and vary only in knowledge and skills.

28. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the function of a Rex was in assuring people the protection of the natural prescriptive law of the land, through compelling men and women through warrant from writ to the accountability of the natural law of the land, and they themselves stood before their peers to account for their actions. The equivalent of the Rex, the court Sheriff, is still the highest authority in the land.

29. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the Rex always acted under writ and warrant, to bring those accused before the court; or acted under jury verdict to take back stolen property and return it to the rightful possessor as the court established, to keep the peace in other words, not sovereign but servant of the law.

30.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refute that all documents claiming any sovereign as Rex Anglorum are forgeries made after the conquest by the Roman Catholic Church from 1066, meaning the ‘Rex of the English’ establish a false genetic lineage to Rex Offa, and attribute sovereign status where none existed, Offa lived in and around the 8^th century his name was one he gave himself at some point in his life, the ancestry of Offa is a mystery lost, or expunged over the centuries, the documents which claim lineage and precedent are proven forgeries of the 13^th century. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that any who claim to be a sovereign have no rightful or lawful claim, and those acting in that role have always done so through the imposition of the force of arms on those without arms, in the suppression and division upon the true law with imposed contract; I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that all men and women are equal in sight of the law.

Removal of the presumption of law

31. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that legislation is to confirm or validate what was before void or unlawful; to add the sanction and authority of positive law to that which before was without or against the prescriptive law. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that legislation is only the policy of a corporation to make legal or lawful in positive law their policy upon the members of that corporation (Positive law is based upon the imposition of authority, the force of arms, positive law only applies to slaves).

32. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the only people bound by the policy of a corporation are those who are working in function of that corporation, as its agents, administrators or functionaries. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that I am only bound by the natural prescriptive law of the land, and further that no corporate policy known as legislation applies to me unless I act in function of the issuing corporation, however I have never worked in function of the corporation issuing the policy of any legislation.

33.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that all corporations are structured in the same way as a trust, as are ‘all’ courts, governments and associations that function as corporations. Nor am I in receipt of any factual document which refutes that there structure is; the “Father” is the grantor of the trust, so the executor, he invests the substance, the “Son” is the administrator of the trust, he is the trustee, who can gain no benefit himself, the “Holy Ghost” is the incorporeal entity that holds the substance in a legal instrument. In government the substance is taken from the men and women the government extracts revenue from, so they are the executors; the administrators of the government corporate trust are the trustees (administrators), from the Queen, and prime minister to the police officer and road sweeper, the trustee is the civil servant, public servant or government employee. The trust is held within the legal instrument of the Crown Corporation, by the Roman Catholic Church directed from the City, known as the square mile in London, and administered in Westminster.

Charter

34.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes the words of Thomas Paine (1731–1809) “It is a perversion of terms to say that a charter gives rights. It operates by a contrary effect — that of taking rights away. Rights are inherently in all the inhabitants; but charters, by annulling those rights, in the majority, leave the right, by exclusion, in the hands of a few. ... They...consequently are instruments of injustice”

35. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that all corporation exists upon Charter, and that all charter is void, as in the law you are only bound by any written contract you are a direct signatory party to, further you can only contract with other living tangible men or women in prescriptive law, so every and all written contract imposed without signed consent is void within the natural law of the land. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that without evidence of consent, any contract is void, all unsigned and witnessed contract is not recognised or considered valid, and full disclosure of all details, and obligations are also a requirement of lawful contract.

Estate

36. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that the "Doctrine of Estates" has grown from the feudal system, as is stated in this quote from ‘Introduction to the Law of Property. 1958’: “One speaks of ownership of a car yet, in the context of land, one does not, technically, refer to ownership of the land; instead, an abstract entity, known as an 'Estate' was created and one's ownership rights are defined by this abstract entity.”

37. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes this statement from ‘Modern Land Law 4^th edn.’ “English law has never embraced the concept of absolute ownership of land. The closest it has come to doing so is when a person is registered as the proprietor of land with an absolute title. Even then, however, as will be seen, that person's title is not indefeasible. Where title to the land is unregistered, this is even more the case. All that a person can do is to demonstrate that he has the better right to possess the land than anyone else

37.  I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that all corporations are incorporeal entities, an artificial person, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of legislation. Being the mere creature of legislation, they possess only those properties which the charter of their creation confers upon them, either expressly or as incidental to their very existence.

38. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that as a dead body of policy all interests in land held by corporations are the same as a deceased person at death so are held within the ‘estate’ of the dead body, a corporation is a body of men/women united or combined into one incorporeal body, to make a legal corps (dead body), whose holdings are known as mortmain, 'the dead man’s hand'. Under the natural law of the land a dead man/woman cannot possess immovable property; in truth they can possess nothing, their dead, so it immediately falls to their tangible living inheritor/s.

39. I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that no corporation can claim inheritors, as they never lived and a written ‘will’ is made by the living, further they have no tangible offspring, I am not in receipt of any factual document which refutes that they are indeed a fiction created to impose monopoly, fraud and poverty upon tangible men and women, they are an incorporeal entity that is simply the invention of a charter, and that their claim of estate is held in the colour of law.

Conclusion of Affidavit

40. If no sound rebuttal of the stated facts herein are made within the passing of 40 days all other claims will be quashed, and this lawful claim confirmed, as the right has accrued from the conclusion of the time given for rebuttal; thereafter (named claimant) will seek to have any registration of claim removed from any and all registers, as no man ought to act in ignorance, to hide the lawful claim here declared and another party claim ownership in contradiction to the facts, is a deception, any attempt by another party to sell the use of the claim is an act of fraud; any attempt to share gains from the claim by State, Church, government or corporation is unlawful and denied without any reservation; it is unlawful for any other party to use any part of the claim, that have not first gained permission in written contract from (named claimant).

41. If any party encroaches upon the lawful claim here made, a lawful action will incur remedy, all costs and compensations will be sort of the encroaching party/parties. Any debts bound in claim to this property within the death pledge of the banks, or as bond for security are declared void, and the burden of their repayment or settlement remains with the debtor to settle, contest or default, and has no lawful basis upon the true allodial nature of land and its resources.

42. This affidavit is my sworn statement of fact, removing all presumptions of law and fact, I seal this contract on (date) with my wet signature and thumb print:

(Printed Name followed by Signature - No title/fiction before the wet signature in red ink, NOT in full capitalisation)

Thumb Print

This signed statement of fact witnessed by:

(Printed Name followed by Signature - No title/fiction before the wet signature in red ink, NOT in full capitalisation)

Thumb Print

(Printed Name followed by Signature - No title/fiction before the wet signature in red ink, NOT in full capitalisation)

Thumb Print

Twenty three make a full community seal

43. All honourable Signatories, signing on this date, both as a representative number of the community and those tangible men and women who physically neighbour the claim detailed within this affidavit of service, each signature witnessed, stating that, ‘They have no objection to this lawful claim, and know of no tangible living man or woman who holds a stronger prior claim’:

First Signatory of support of lawful claim.

I, distinguished as (Printed Name followed by Signature - No title/fiction before the wet signature in red ink, NOT in full capitalisation) make this contract currency through my signature. ‘I here declare I have no objection to this lawful claim, and know of no tangible living man or woman who holds a stronger prior claim’.

Proof of the verification and bond of this contract is evidence by the sealing with my thumb print, which is delivery of the seal of my oath

Thumb print here

Witness signatures

Second Signatory

I, distinguished as (Printed Name followed by Signature - No title/fiction before the wet signature in red ink, NOT in full capitalisation) make this contract currency through my signature. ‘I here declare I have no objection to this lawful claim, and know of no tangible living man or woman who holds a stronger prior claim’

Proof of the verification and bond of this contract is evidence by the sealing with my thumb print, which is delivery of the seal of my oath

Thumb print here

Witness signatures

Third Signatory

I, distinguished as (Printed Name followed by Signature - No title/fiction before the wet signature in red ink, NOT in full capitalisation) make this contract currency through my signature. ‘I here declare I have no objection to this lawful claim, and know of no tangible living man or woman who holds a stronger prior claim’

Proof of the verification and bond of this contract is evidence by the sealing with my thumb print, which is delivery of the seal of my oath

Thumb print here

Witness signatures

Continued to twenty three….

The whole community now in seal is greater than the sum of those seals, what are here twenty three seals combined in one voice, invokes the great seal of the community.

Appendix one of Affidavit:

Definition of Allodial rights

1. Allodial means: ‘al' designated to mean ‘all.’, ‘od’ means property, together ‘Alod’ means having all property rights, ‘ial’ means ‘all within that concept’. Allodial right is a situation where real property (land, buildings and fixtures) are held free and clear of any encumbrances, including liens, mortgages and tax obligations. Allodial title is inalienable, in that it cannot be taken by any operation of law for any reason whatsoever, (beyond the single intentional actions of manifesting long term damage to surrounding property, as this would be an encroachment upon my neighbours and a dereliction of my exigent duty of care, this would be established in remedy with recourse through the inalienable Rights of the individual defended through the reality of an entrusted, committed burden, duty and obligation of twenty three peer committee of plea system (assembly and deliberation in the constituting of fairness through tort remedy) in the right of only natural Law.)

2. Allodial lands are the absolute property of their custodian and not subject to any service or acknowledgement to a superior, this concept denies the legal power of municipal and state governments to tax property, (if they were in existence) on the basis that allodial title cannot be alienated by failure to pay those taxes.

3. Allodium claim cannot be alienated by seizure by a creditor, as the claim of the foreclosure by the mortgagee is unlawful. However, by its nature, allodial title cannot be mortgaged in the first place, and an attempt to create allodium claim on land that is subject to encumbrance by a debt of the claimant is impossible, the debt could never lawfully be applied to the land or its fixtures in the first instance, as you cannot lawful hold a duplicate account of claim of the same property, this would only exist in the colour of law without challenge, all claims of mortgage are here re-butted as unlawful contracts, in both form and substance.

4. Allodial title cannot be lawfully taken away against the will of the custodian. However, an allodial custodian can contractually give up allodial custodianship through contract, inheritance or abandonment, or sold (added value only, the land and its natural resources always remain free in saleable value, as you always remain the custodian only not the owner, you can sell the labours you have invested in the land). Allodial title cannot be exchanged by fraud, only by legitimate contract. (For example you could not use your allodial property as a stake for a wager, just as much as the collateral for a loan, as you are only custodian.)

5. Allodial property cannot be owned by a corporation, being a group recognised as an individual by legislation, being a group colony of individuals, working in unity against the community for their own benefit. Only single individuals can hold allodial rights and custodianship under natural law.

Appendix two of Affadavit:

Double Bond of Performance

1. This bond is binding me the allodarii, to a performance of good custodianship of the claim here declared, with those neighbouring the claim who have made currency this lawful claim of unconstrained and exclusive right of use with their signature, by having no objection to this lawful claim, and knowing of no tangible living man or woman who holds a stronger prior claim.

2. I am bound to always remain within the natural law, as detailed within the Community Contract by Deed and Constat Affidavit of Lawful Society.

3. I will not encroach upon the claimed property of my neighbours, through the unreasonable dissemination of strong odours, loud sounds or heavy smoke, and if any party feels encroached upon from such behaviour, I am bound to remedy the encroachment in a timely manner upon request.

4. I will not pollute with any unnatural agent any waterways or sources passing through my claim, or contaminate any surrounding plant life with genetically altered plants, seeds, pollen or cause the introduction of parasites or disease, I am bound to remedy any such incident of encroachment in a timely manner, and remove all contamination if possible or face further remedy, if I fail to rectify the encroachment and am proven to have encroached in a premeditated or criminally incompetent manner resulting in an aberrant and irreversible result, a jury of my peers who have weighed the facts and have full consensus in conclusion may as the most severe counteractant, declare defeasance upon my claim as remedy.

5. I will not hoard waste of any sort that would constitute an eyesore, or attract vermin like rats upon the claim, I am bound to remedy any encroachment in a timely manner, and eradicate any vermin I have drawn and encouraged.

6.  I will not construct any buildings, walls or towers that are seen as out of place if visible externally upon the claim, if any structure that maybe deemed out of keeping it would require the establishment of rectitude  with all neighbours, notices will be posted and objection debated and remedy sort, for equitable conclusion.

7.  I will maintain clear rights of way, as all free men have a right to pass over any claim if they cause no harm or encroachment; I am bound to remedy this in a timely manner if no rights of way exist already.

Notes:

At the same time as the affidavits are sent to those who claim registration or duplicate account of the claim, post a notice upon the land claim itself for pubic viewing, and post a notice in the local paper for three weeks, local to the land claim informing any interested parties of your intentions and making them aware if they wish to contest your claim. Once the period of 40 days has passed without response you have an un-rebutted affidavit, this means you can lawfully take possession of the property, if this is challenged you have a lawful document of claim, meaning any who contest your claim must seek remedy in the courts.

The next step in this process is to remove all registration of your claim from any and all registers, through sending a lawful petition (recorded) with a a copy of the document of affirmation, to the head trustee of their respective corporations, this makes your intentions clear in law, and if any action is attempted against you to subvert or supersede your lawful claim, you have given full and clear notice to all concerned parties from the start, so making your lawful claim powerful in law and court.

This allodium claim is achieved in the establishing of a lawful affidavit (after locating where you’d wish to exercise a right of use), consisting of the collection of signatures and thumb prints of twenty three independent tangible men and women who physically neighbour the claim, each witnessed, stating that, ‘they have no objection to your claim, and know of no tangible man or woman who holds a stronger prior claim’, the affidavit should be notarised by a natural law notary public (notary seal), those 23 then forming the second seal of a full community, and the third seal of signatures and thumb prints, this is then sent to any concerned parties as a affidavit, to the allow rebuttal of that claim. If within the UK to:

Public Trustee Malcolm Dawson,

Chief Land Registrar

Land Registry Croydon Office
Trafalgar House
1 Bedford Park
Croydon
CR0 2AQ

Public Trustee Kenneth Clarke, MP

Ministry of Justice

102 Petty France
Westminster

London

SW1H 9AJ

Public Trustee Vince Cable MP

Department for Business, Innovation and Skills  

1 Victoria Street
London SW1H 0ET

In Scotland:

The Keeper of the Registers of Scotland

Public Trustee Sheenagh Adams

Erskine House
68 Queen Street
Edinburgh
EH2 4NF

The claim may also have a corporate claim, like a bank, or other corporate body claiming it as estate in the colour of law, these would need to be discovered and informed.