Saturday, January 31, 2015

3-7-1845: “The culpable negligence and recklessness of many of our village boys in the use of powder, and fire arms, has long been a source of complaint and alarm.”

Vermont Phœnix, “The culpable negligence and recklessness of many of our village boys in the use of powder, and fire arms, has long been a source of complaint and alarm.”, March 7, 1845

1-10-1845: “The Legislature has passed a joint resolution to loan 2 brass field pieces and other arms to some Oregon emigrants.”

Missouri: “The Legislature has passed a joint resolution to loan 2 brass field pieces and other arms to some Oregon emigrants.”, Jan. 10, 1845

12-23-1844: “Firing Pistols in the streets. It has become quite a practice of late . . . to carry about their persons fire arms and discharge them in the streets at night.”

American Republican And Baltimore Daily Clipper, “Firing Pistols in the streets. It has become quite a practice of late, for certain exquisits and geniuses of the soap-lock order, to carry about their persons fire arms and discharge them in the streets at night.”, Dec. 23, 1844

7-13-1844: “A large meeting of the crowd, armed with muskets, convened at the Wharton Market, and with two field pieces, wheels muffled, proceeded from thence up Front street with the avowed intention of attacking the military. . . .”

Philadelphia Riots, “A large meeting of the crowd, armed with muskets, convened at the Wharton Market, and with two field pieces, wheels muffled, proceeded from thence up Front street with the avowed intention of attacking the military. . . .”, July 13, 1844

Philadelphia Riots of 1844, “Only a flood of new forces—including citizen posses, city police, militia companies arriving from other cities, and U.S. army and navy troops—ended the violence”

Philadelphia Riots of 1844, “Only a flood of new forces—including citizen posses, city police, militia companies arriving from other cities, and U.S. army and navy troops—ended the violence”, 1844

People need to WAKE UP

   Government is NOT here to "protect" you. That is a right and duty left to each and every individual citizen. Government was instituted in order to provide for the "common defense". And each and every person is left to fend for themselves and their loved ones. The courts have ruled to that end repeatedly.

   Consider the amount of corruption we see in government. It is witnessed every single day here in our country. The police are daily shooting down, beating, choking or shocking innocent people to death. So much for "protection", eh?

   The people that framed our governments knew the corrupting influence of 'power'. And they did their best to provide a system of checks and balances in order to keep it in line. However, We The People have been lax in exercising some of the most crucial aspects of the "checks and balances" system. Which is namely; 1st, that we voice our grievances - LOUDLY if necessary. 2nd, that we show our hired servants that we ARE their MASTERS. And, that we ARE willing to stand up and FORCE them back into their Constitutionally delegated position. Otherwise, they WILL continue to steamroll right over us. For THAT is the nature of power.

   Wake the hell up America.

   Do nothing cowardice has NO PLACE in a Free country. Not if you want to continue to be free, that is. If you don't have the gonads to do it for yourself. THEN STAY THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY of the people that are attempting to restore our intended system. Stop whining and stay in your closet and shiver in fear all by yourself. Because cowardice is infectious.

Friday, January 30, 2015

[July 4, 1844] "“At midnight the streets were filled with boys who . . . seemed to be bountifully supplied with pistols, guns and small cannon"

Vermont Phœnix, “At midnight the streets were filled with boys who commenced and kept up until broad day light, an incessant discharge of firearms . . . these young patriots seemed to be bountifully supplied with pistols, guns and small cannon, with which they kept up a constant firing in our principle streets”, July 12, 1844

More "assault weapons" ammunition....

[The Columbia Democrat, Bloomsburg, Columbia County, PA. Saturday, April 27, 1844. Volume VIII. Number 1. Pg. 4]

Also See:


1-17-1844: “he shall summon the owner of the slave from whom said arms or weapons have been seized . . . and shew cause why said arms should not be condemned and forfeited”

South Carolina General Assembly, “he shall summon the owner of the slave from whom said arms or weapons have been seized . . . and shew cause why said arms should not be condemned and forfeited”, Jan. 17, 1844

1-3-1844: New York City: [New Year's Day] “At an early hour the preceding evening (Sunday as it was!) the fitful discharge of fire-arms in every quarter

New-York Daily Tribune, New York City: [New Year's Day] “At an early hour the preceding evening (Sunday as it was!) the fitful discharge of fire-arms in every quarter”, Jan. 3, 1844

12-9-1842: “they can be drawn from the pocket and used with one hand without the loss of a moment; six shots can be fired as fast as a man can crook his finger.”

Burlington Free Press, Pangborn & Brinsmaid Ad; “they can be drawn from the pocket and used with one hand without the loss of a moment; six shots can be fired as fast as a man can crook his finger.”, Dec. 9, 1842

10-1-1842: “As soon as this was known our citizens prepared themselves . . . Between two and three hundred men carried fire arms”

The Caledonian, “As soon as this was known our citizens prepared themselves, and by 8 o’clock, between four and five hundred men were ready for action, armed with such weapons as the shortness of the time would admit. Between two and three hundred men carried fire arms”, Oct. 1, 1842

12-27-1841: “all the inhabitants of the Valley of the Mississippi will march upon Texas–they are familiar with fire arms and their aim is certain...."

The Radical, “all the inhabitants of the Valley of the Mississippi will march upon Texas–they are familiar with fire arms and their aim is certain. Thousands of them will pass the Sabine as soon as they hear that Texas is invaded…”, Dec. 27, 1841

Thursday, January 29, 2015

Go get 'em Reverend!

DIABOLICAL VILLANY.

   We inadvertently omitted to notice, heretofore, a most diabolical attempt which was made on the life of a highly respected fellow-citizen of our county. The Register of this city gives the following account of this shameful outrage: “A horrid attempt was made a few nights since, to assassinate the Rev. Josiah Crudup, formerly of this vicinity, but now a resident of the adjoining county of Granville. He was sitting in his own house, surrounded by his family, reading the President’s Message, when the report of fire-arms was heard, and at the same moment a window pane fell in, and a Rifle ball passing within a hair’s breadth of Mr. Crudup’s head, lodged in the opposite wall. Mr. C. with great presence of mind, immediately seized a loaded musket, and rushing to the door, fired in the direction in which retreating footsteps were heard.”

[The North-Carolina Standard, Raleigh, N.C., Wednesday, January 12, 1842. Vol. VIII.--No. 376. Pg. 2]

Well, well, what have we here?

   The following is instructive in more ways than one. For it shows that free African American citizens had arms in 1841. And that citizens had military cannon. Interesting how that this event isn't taught in history classes:

The Baton Rouge Gazette: Cincinnati Riot; “The blacks, apprehensive that some serious difficulties would take place, had prepared themselves with fire-arms to resist an attack if made.”, Sept. 5, 1841

Wednesday, January 28, 2015

3-17-1841: Former President John Quincy Adams: “without warrant of law, by force, by firearms, seizes and disarms them..."

Former President John Quincy Adams, before the U.S. Supreme Court, United States v. Libellants and Claimants of the Schooner Amistad, 40 U.S. 518 (1841), “without warrant of law, by force, by firearms, seizes and disarms them, then being in the peace of that commonwealth and of the United States . . . by what law it was done, and how far the principle it embraces is to be carried.”, March 17, 1841

All the [ex] President's Men...

Vermont Telegraph, Former President’s [John Quincy Adams] Coachman shot in the U.S. Capital Yard during the trial of the Colt’s rifle. . . . , Feb. 18, 1841

From the Loosely related, but instructive nonetheless category:

A Distinguished Officer in the U.S. Army, “Any one, becoming dissatisfied with republican habits, and our republican government, may find a remedy for his disgust, in the forms and institutions of the old world, where he would see the privileged few as masters and the multitude as their slaves.”, Jan. 2, 1841

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

12-19-1840: "to inquire into the expediency of passing a law prohibiting altogether the use of fire-arms by free persons of color"

Legislature Of N. Carolina, “On motion of Mr. Moore, the Committee on the Judiciary were instructed to inquire into the expediency of passing a law prohibiting altogether the use of fire-arms by free persons of color, or of regulating the same by such conditions as may be useful”, Dec. 19, 1840

Think about it....

The Illinois Free Trader, “The practice of shooting about our business streets, and in fact in every part of the town, is quite common, in almost every hour of the day (and especially on the sabbath) the report of firearms may be heard in every direction.”, Nov. 27, 1840

5-2-1840: "“and if any person shall wantonly, knowingly and willfully fire or discharge any gun, pistol, or other small arms, within the limits of said town"

Camden, S.C. Ordinance: “and if any person shall wantonly, knowingly and willfully fire or discharge any gun, pistol, or other small arms, within the limits of said town, such person shall forfet and pay to the use of the said town, the sum of one dollar for each and every offence”, May 2, 1840

Monday, January 26, 2015

Sunday, January 25, 2015

5-18-1839: “Provided, that shooting on public days without lead, shall not be considered a violation of this ordinance.”

City Council, City of Maumee, Ohio; “Provided, that shooting on public days without lead, shall not be considered a violation of this ordinance.”, May 18, 1839

3-22-1839: Colt’s Patent Repeating Fire Arms Ad; “The Public are respectfully informed that the above articles can be seen and are sale at Gossip & Co.”

The True American, Colt’s Patent Repeating Fire Arms Ad; “The Public are respectfully informed that the above articles can be seen and are sale at Gossip & Co.”, March 22, 1839

8-16-1837: “Our attention has been directed to the practice of shooting guns within the limits of the city, contrary to an Ordinance of the Police”

The North-Carolina Standard, “Our attention has been directed to the practice of shooting guns within the limits of the city, contrary to an Ordinance of the Police”, Aug. 16, 1837

5-31-1837: “I am lately from that part–and I would advise every one who intends emigrating to Texas to furnish himself with provisions, fire-arms, and ammunition, for his own protection…”

Vermont Telegraph, “I am lately from that part–and I would advise every one who intends emigrating to Texas to furnish himself with provisions, fire-arms, and ammunition, for his own protection…”, May 31, 1837

1-12-1836: “One of the bears instantly seized the child in his paws . . . At this instant fire arms were brought, and two or three deadly aims . . .”

The Rutland Herald, “One of the bears instantly seized the child in his paws . . . At this instant fire arms were brought, and two or three deadly aims . . .”, Jan. 12, 1836

7-29-1852: “The unusual number of accidents from fire arms in New York, on the late National Anniversary, is ascribed to the sale to boys of some hundreds of defective cast-iron pistols”

Meigs County Telegraph, “The unusual number of accidents from fire arms in New York, on the late National Anniversary, is ascribed to the sale to boys of some hundreds of defective cast-iron pistols”, July 29, 1852

Friday, January 23, 2015

Communism In America

    Starting to build a very interesting page, that only promises to get more interesting. Of that I can assure you. America has been, to a certain extent, under the influence of communism for around 174 years. Yes, you read right - ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-FOUR YEARS.

See:

Thursday, January 22, 2015

4-23-1852: “Then they propose to deprive the people of their lawful arms under a pretence of lending them to Kossuth. The constitution expressly secures to the people the right to bear arms, but what is that right practically good for when there are no arms to be had?”

Carroll Free Press, “Then they propose to deprive the people of their lawful arms under a pretence of lending them to Kossuth. The constitution expressly secures to the people the right to bear arms, but what is that right practically good for when there are no arms to be had?”, April 23, 1852

1-31-1852: "and inviolability of the people’s right to bear arms, because it is only by the final possibility of violent resistance that the final possibility of violent usurpation is prevented.”

New-York Daily Tribune, American Revolutionary Union for Europe; “3. Abolition of standing armies and inviolability of the people’s right to bear arms, because it is only by the final possibility of violent resistance that the final possibility of violent usurpation is prevented.”, Jan. 31, 1852

12-12-1851: In the U.S. Circuit Court, “We had no laws to forbid the wearing swords as dangerous weapons, or to prohibit the sale of powder and ball to any man, or any color, or of any extraction. We permitted every one to have arms, to bear arms, and to use arms"

Trial of Castner Hanaway, (For Treason), U.S. Circuit Court, “We had no laws to forbid the wearing swords as dangerous weapons, or to prohibit the sale of powder and ball to any man, or any color, or of any extraction. We permitted every one to have arms, to bear arms, and to use arms…”, Dec. 10, 1851

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

12-12-1851: “Among the dearest rights of the freeman was that of bearing arms"

   “Among the dearest rights of the freeman was that of bearing arms–give this right to the nations of Europe, and they cannot but soon be free…”–Maj. Gen. [Charles W.] Sandford, Dec. 12, 1851, at the Municipal Dinner in New-York to honor Gov. Kossuth of Hungary, by the Committee of Thirteen appointed to secure the legal defense of persons claimed as Fugitive Slaves. [New-York Daily Tribune, Saturday, December 13, 1851. Vol. XI....No. 3,325. Pg. 5]

8-28-1851: "If any of our friends are determined to go, we advise them to go well armed”

The Indiana State Sentinel, “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defence of his person and his property . . . If any of our friends are determined to go, we advise them to go well armed”, Aug. 28, 1851

   Can anyone remember the last time a main-stream newspaper advised their readers to go "well armed"? Yeah, me neither....

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

8-22-1851: “Colt’s Repeaters.–So great is the demand for this pistol in the United States, that 300 men and over one hundred thousand dollars worth of machinery cannot supply the demand.”

The Athens Post, “Colt’s Repeaters.–So great is the demand for this pistol in the United States, that 300 men and over one hundred thousand dollars worth of machinery cannot supply the demand.”, Aug. 22, 1851

Ever wonder where that "Sporting Purposes" idea came from? Well, now you have it....

Congress.

Washington, Sept. 26. . . .

. . . Mr. Jefferson Davis said the bill [bill making grants of Public Lands to the several States for the relief of insane persons.] could not pass without strong opposition.

   The question was taken, and agreed to.

   Mr. Jefferson Davis opposed the bill. Congress, he said, had no power to grant public property for such purposes. It had as much power to establish Government Orphan Asylums and Government Schools. . . .

. . . Mr. Cobb, of Ala., offered a proviso, which occasioned much laughter, namely–”having in view the salutary effect of the Peace Convention at Frankfort-on-the-Main, we may abolish arms for the use of war, and that the arms may be made on such a plan as they may be used for hunting game and other amusements.” The entire clause was then stricken out.

And yes, of course Mr. Cobb was a democrat.

4-19-1775: ”The throwing aside the implements of husbandry, and leaving their teams in the half finished furrows, they flew to their houses, snatched up their arms”

Battle of Lexington,”The throwing aside the implements of husbandry, and leaving their teams in the half finished furrows, they flew to their houses, snatched up their arms”, April 19, 1775

[Had the British won the war]: “Among the privileges of which we should have been bereft, that of freely possessing fire arms should be included. One of the first acts of the victors would have been to disarm the vanquished."

    “In the eloquent performance of our orator, among other topics, we have a review of what would have been the probable condition of this republic, had the British arms subdued our resistance: “Among the privileges of which we should have been bereft, that of freely possessing fire arms should be included. One of the first acts of the victors would have been to disarm the vanquished. Monarchs are too jealous of their subjects to intrust them with arms, except under the strictest inspection; and the rebellious conduct of the Americans would have brought upon them a severer chastisement than the utmost rigor of this rule of policy could inflict.”–Charles Pelham Curtis, July 4, 1823. For The City Authorities. [The Hundred Boston Orators Appointed by the Municipal Authorities and Other Public Bodies, From 1770 To 1852; Comprising Historical Gleanings, Illustrating The Principles And Progress Of Our Republican Institutions. By James Spear Loring. "I would have these orations collected and printed in volumes, and then write the history of the last forty-five years in commentaries upon them."--John Adams, in 1816. . . . Boston: John P. Jewett And Company. Cleveland, Ohio: Jewett, Proctor & Worthington. 1852. Pg. 400]

7-4-1803: "And whence do the plottings of turpitude, or the dreams of imbecility, pretend to gather that force which is to vanquish a people who have arms in their hands..."

   "The evils which are said to menace our happiness," remarks Sullivan, "are attributed to the monarchical and aristocratical tendencies of our government on the one part, and to its democratical preponderance on the other. We are told that there are men among us who covet distinctions incompatible with the general welfare,--distinctions which will require the radiance of monarchy and the force of obedient legions to cherish and support them. The throne, it is said, must first be established, because it is the fountain of honor, whence is to flow the stream which is to render its partakers illustrious and noble. A throne could be established only by the will of the people, or by military power. Who will be mad enough to expect such a will amongst people who possess the best information, and to whom death and dependence have equal terrors? And whence do the plottings of turpitude, or the dreams of imbecility, pretend to gather that force which is to vanquish a people who have arms in their hands, and whose hearts are the dwellings of valor?"--William Sullivan, July 4, 1803. For The Town Authorities. [The Hundred Boston Orators Appointed by the Municipal Authorities and Other Public Bodies, From 1770 To 1852; Comprising Historical Gleanings, Illustrating The Principles And Progress Of Our Republican Institutions. By James Spear Loring. "I would have these orations collected and printed in volumes, and then write the history of the last forty-five years in commentaries upon them."--John Adams, in 1816. . . . Boston: John P. Jewett And Company. Cleveland, Ohio: Jewett, Proctor & Worthington. 1852. Pg. 313]

Boston, 1775: "Gov. Gage began to take possession of all the arms and military stores belonging to individuals and the public.”

   “Before we continue the history of John Hancock, we will revert a while to an incident that occurred in Boston when it was a besieged town, as his name is associated with it. At the close of 1774, and in the early part of 1775, Gov. Gage began to take possession of all the arms and military stores belonging to individuals and the public.”–[The Hundred Boston Orators Appointed by the Municipal Authorities and Other Public Bodies, From 1770 To 1852; Comprising Historical Gleanings, Illustrating The Principles And Progress Of Our Republican Institutions. By James Spear Loring. "I would have these orations collected and printed in volumes, and then write the history of the last forty-five years in commentaries upon them."--John Adams, in 1816. . . . Boston: John P. Jewett And Company. Cleveland, Ohio: Jewett, Proctor & Worthington. 1852. Pg. 89]

Monday, January 19, 2015

2-22-1890: “Now, simply carrying weapons can not be looked upon as a trespass upon the rights of others, and to prohibit one from carrying them for his own defense is a trespass upon his personal right."

Arizona Weekly Enterprise, “Now, simply carrying weapons can not be looked upon as a trespass upon the rights of others, and to prohibit one from carrying them for his own defense is a trespass upon his personal right. . . . it is by means of weapons and weapons only that we can defend ourselves against the immediate attacks of outlawry and every law prohibiting the citizen this right of defense is an act in favor of the outlaw.”, Feb. 22, 1890

8-25-1881: “The right of self-defense is one form of the right to life, which is inalienable; a man cannot divest himself of it, and the Constitution presumes..."

Iron County Register, “The right of self-defense is one form of the right to life, which is inalienable; a man cannot divest himself of it, and the Constitution presumes that those who propose to destroy a man’s life or home or property, do not always give him notice of their intention so to do; he must then have the legal right to be always ready for defense to the uttermost, at any moment, or with any weapon he can demand. The Constitution gives a man the right of self-defense with any weapon”, Aug. 25, 1881

Jan, 1878: New Mexico Governor [former Chief Justice of the New Mexico Territorial Supreme Court] Samuel B. Axtell . . .

New Mexico Governor [former Chief Justice of the New Mexico Territorial Supreme Court] Samuel B. Axtell*, “I recommend that the statute against carrying arms be repealed. The constitution of the United States provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. . . . it is not safe to travel unarmed on our highways”, Jan. 1878

All [unconstitutional] 'gun control' laws . . .

   Are either based on cowardice, fear, prejudice, greed, or lust [for 'power']. All of which are the very evils which are destroying our once great nation. We used to have a "pair", and EVERYONE knew it. And more importantly, they RESPECTED it.

   Just take a look at us now....

3-8-1877: "What becomes of the provision of the Constitution of the United States that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?"

The Pickens Sentinel, “White Slavery In South Carolina . . . What becomes of the provision of the Constitution of the United States that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed? Under the circumstances it certainly looks like an arbitrary, unwarranted, unconstitutional exercise of arbitrary power.”, March 8, 1877

10-16-1876: “The Constitution of the United States declares that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” And yet the miserable carpetbagger who defiles the Gubernatorial chair..."

The Charlotte Democrat, “The Constitution of the United States declares that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” And yet the miserable carpetbagger who defiles the Gubernatorial chair of South Carolina, order the disarming of the whites, immediately after the arrival of 20,000 stand of arms”, Oct. 16, 1876 Charlotte Democrat 10-16-1876

Sunday, January 18, 2015

10-14-1876: “Whence does the governor of South Carolina derive authority to construe the exercise of a high constitutional right into an insurrection? The federal constitution declares that ”the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”

The Daily Argus, “Whence does the governor of South Carolina derive authority to construe the exercise of a high constitutional right into an insurrection? The federal constitution declares that ”the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”, Oct. 14, 1876

10-14-1876: “the idea of disarming the white population is treated with utter scorn. The members of these clubs have bought and paid for their own weapons”

New York World, “the idea of disarming the white population is treated with utter scorn. The members of these clubs have bought and paid for their own weapons”, Oct. 14, 1876

10-12-1876: "the Constitution of the United States, which guarantees to the people the right to keep and bear arms, will, should the time arrive to invoke that aid, afford every needful protection. The owner can, therefore, retain his gun or his sabre, and of course he will do so”

Yorkville Enquirer, “Each member owning a gun, whether it be a flint-lock blunderbuss, a Spencer rifle or an Austrian needle-gun, can claim that arm as his own private property, the same as his watch or spectacle-case; and in the quiet, peaceable possession of this article of private property, the Constitution of the United States, which guarantees to the people the right to keep and bear arms, will, should the time arrive to invoke that aid, afford every needful protection. The owner can, therefore, retain his gun or his sabre, and of course he will do so”, Oct. 12, 1876

7-10-1876: “The text of the Constitution, as it now stands, might easily be held as a limitation upon the power of the Legislature, and the practice of carrying concealed weapons be justified under the right so solemnly guaranteed to keep and bear arms”

The Charlotte Democrat, “The text of the Constitution, as it now stands, might easily be held as a limitation upon the power of the Legislature, and the practice of carrying concealed weapons be justified under the right so solemnly guaranteed to keep and bear arms”, July 10, 1876

9-11-1875: “It is plain, from the nature of the case, that the government cannot, by its own neglect, nor by any prohibition, in any degree infringe this great inherent right of a free people to keep and bear arms..."

Hon. Geo. L. Potter, “It is plain, from the nature of the case, that the government cannot, by its own neglect, nor by any prohibition, in any degree infringe this great inherent right of a free people to keep and bear arms . . . How worthless would be such a right, and how thin the protection it would secure, if the people could not act without the permit of negligent or usurping rulers!”, Sept. 11, 1875

1-15-1875: Gen. Sheridan: “You cannot have good government in any country, where secretly armed bodies of men exist.” . . . New York Tribune: “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

The Herald And Mail, Gen. Sheridan: “You cannot have good government in any country, where secretly armed bodies of men exist.” . . . New York Tribune: “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”, Jan. 15, 1875

9-23-1874: "that one by one their dearest rights had been trampled upon, until finally, the right, to keep and bear arms, a right guaranteed by the constitution of the United States, has been denied.”

The Grange Advance, “the people of that city had been subjected to outrage upon outrage by an usurping State government; that one by one their dearest rights had been trampled upon, until finally, the right, to keep and bear arms, a right guaranteed by the constitution of the United States, has been denied.”, Sept. 23, 1874

9-17-1874: General Order No. 7, “All private arms purchased by citizens will be taken to the respective homes of those who bear and own them.”

Col. E. John Ellis*, General Order No. 7, “All private arms purchased by citizens will be taken to the respective homes of those who bear and own them.”, Sept. 17, 1874

7-4-1874: “When the American people admitted the negroes to the rights of citizenship, that of keeping and bearing arms was included. This is a right which the constitution says shall not be infringed.”

The Caucasian, “When the American people admitted the negroes to the rights of citizenship, that of keeping and bearing arms was included. This is a right which the constitution says shall not be infringed.”, July 4, 1874

Saturday, January 17, 2015

Texas, Report of Sub-Committee, “The police and State guard are armed, and lord it over the land, while the citizen dare not, under heavy pains and penalties, bear arms to defend himself"

Texas, Report of Sub-Committee, “The police and State guard are armed, and lord it over the land, while the citizen dare not, under heavy pains and penalties, bear arms to defend himself . . . . While in form we have a Republican government, in substance and in fact we have a despotism which constantly becomes more and more absolute, and will certainly end in the unqualified enslavement of the people unless some check is interposed.”, Sept. 25, 1871

4-21-1870: “by whose usurped authority, sustained by the military power of the government, tyrannical and unconstitutional laws have been enacted and enforced"

The Plymouth Democrat, “by whose usurped authority, sustained by the military power of the government, tyrannical and unconstitutional laws have been enacted and enforced–the rights of the people to keep and bear arms have been infringed”, April 21, 1870

   The above article was obviously in a 'democrat party' paper. It was blasting the Republicans for their many violations of the Constitution. An evil practice which the 'democrats' don't seem to have a problem with either. We were warned:
   “Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party.”--George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796.
   We The People need to FLUSH the 'party' system here in America. And FORCE our hired and elected servants in our governments to ABIDE by our Constitution. And we either do it very soon, or Freedom and Liberty, (what little of it might be left), is OVER.

Friday, January 16, 2015

THIS IS A MUST READ ARTICLE – Major-General [And, formerly, first Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court] Thomas Ewing, [Jr.]

THIS IS A MUST READ ARTICLE – Major-General [And, formerly, first Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court] Thomas Ewing, [Jr.], “which the Constitution extends to citizens and aliens alike on every foot of ground within the jurisdiction of the United States–the right of exemption from punishment by ex post facto laws; the liberty of speech and of the press; the right to keep and bear arms . . . The constitutional guaranties were in the way of coercive reconstruction; and Congress was forbidden, in peace, to touch any one of them. Unless these ancient and sacred liberties could be destroyed, vigorous military despotisms could not be established–and, without such despotisms. Radical reconstruction was impossible. While those guaranties remained in the Constitution, and were obeyed, the whole governing talent of the South could not be disfranchised by a sweeping ex post facto law . . . It was indispensable, therefore, to get rid of those constitutional provisions, which are at once guarantied of the liberties of the people, and prohibitions of power to Congress.”, July 4, 1868

[The remainder of the article is available here in PDF format for reading or downloading. The article is a MUST READ!!]

1868 N.C. Constitutional Convention: "he believed the right to keep, as well as to bear, arms sacred, and should not be violated. After some debate a vote was taken and the amendment adopted.”

North Carolina Constitutional Convention, “Mr. Graham, of Orange . . . wished to express his sentiments for he believed the right to keep, as well as to bear, arms sacred, and should not be violated. After some debate a vote was taken and the amendment adopted.”, Feb. 18, 1868

Tennessee State Rep. Cason, “and that every male inhabitant of the State shall have a right to keep and bear arms for his common defense.”

Tennessee State Rep. Cason, “and that every male inhabitant of the State shall have a right to keep and bear arms for his common defense.”, Dec. 6, 1867

6-12-1867: “Let every man arm, to protect his property, his life, and the lives of those that are dear to him. . . . Let them see that every man, white or black..."

The Memphis Daily Appeal, “Let every man arm, to protect his property, his life, and the lives of those that are dear to him. . . . Let them see that every man, white or black, who is entitled to vote by law, has opportunity to vote, AND NO OTHERS”, June 12, 1867

6-5-1867: “One thing is certain, that a military officer, who should thus be in antagonism to the Constitution and laws of England, would not only forfeit his command, but would most probably be taken and hung as a traitor.”

The Cadiz Sentinel, “One thing is certain, that a military officer, who should thus be in antagonism to the Constitution and laws of England, would not only forfeit his command, but would most probably be taken and hung as a traitor.”, June 5, 1867

5-23-1867: “For ourselves, we have always believed, with the Supreme Court of Arkansas, that the law prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons was unconstitutional”

Memphis Daily Appeal, “For ourselves, we have always believed, with the Supreme Court of Arkansas, that the law prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons was unconstitutional”, May 23, 1867

We The People . . .

   Do any of us realize, that all of the evil(s) perpetrated by our government(s) within the last 150 years or so. Is being done in our name? That we have ALLOWED our hired servants to go on committing atrocious acts - against We The People ourselves, as well as others throughout the world? Who is it then that is at fault? Whom is it that will be judged for all of the evil that has been done? That's right - We The People.

   Most people realize that there are what is known as "sins of commission". Although, it seems, few are aware of the fact that there are also "sins of omission". Which is of course NOT doing something when we witness evil being done. Granted, that sins of omission are judged less harshly than sins of commission - when those guilty of the sin of omission are unaware that they are doing wrong. But when one is aware that what is being done is wrong. And they stand by and let the evil continue on unabated--then they are just as guilty as those perpetrating the sin of commission.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."--Edmund Burke
   Our forebears used to STAND UP when our hired servants committed evil in our name. And they did so all the way up into the early 1900's. Our hired servants were AFRAID of us, as was INTENDED by the men that formed our government. Just take a look at us now . . . We have become, as Jeffrey R. Snyder put it back in 1993, "A Nation of Cowards". . . .

   But I know that everyone is so busy, (just how our [supposed] 'masters' intended for us to be) . . .

panem et circenses

   [Does anyone else hear that fiddle warming up? . . . .]

Thursday, January 15, 2015

6-14-1866: "In these days of Housebreaking and Robbery, every House, Store, Bank, and Office, should have one of Remington’s Revolvers”

Marshall County Republican, E. Remington & Sons Ad; “Manufacturers Of Revolvers, Rifles, Muskets and Carbines . . . In these days of Housebreaking and Robbery, every House, Store, Bank, and Office, should have one of Remington’s Revolvers”, June 14, 1866

8-25-1865: “Served him right. Every man should keep loaded fire-arms in his house, and not be afraid to use them . . ."

The Evening Argus, “Served him right. Every man should keep loaded fire-arms in his house, and not be afraid to use them . . . That’s the only way to get rid of the house breaking gentry–make it a too dangerous business to follow.”, Aug. 25, 1865

How much more pathetically hypocritical can they get?

The Address of the Democratic State Central Committee, of August, 1864: “patriotism and prudence alike demanded that the constitutional right of the people to keep and bear arms as a necessary means of defense to a free State, should not be violated or abandoned.”, June 17, 1865

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

June 10, 1863: “with instructions to issue their edicts that “the people shall not keep and bear in arms.”

The North Branch Democrat, “with instructions to issue their edicts that “the people shall not keep and bear in arms.” (see military orders issued in the States of Ohio and Indiana.)”, [A parody on Lincoln], June 10, 1863

"The Major General and Colonel aforesaid have a right to prohibit men under their command to purchase arms, lead, &c., but have no more right to prohibit you and I than the Sultan of Turkey.”

U.S. Rep. Clement L. Vallandigham, “Colonel Henry B. Carrington issues Order No. 15, that “the habit of carrying arms upon the person has greatly increased“–it has increased, and will increase more, [cheers]–”and is prejudicial to peace and good order”–give us peace and good order, and we will lay aside our arms–”as well as a violation of civil law” –which the speaker denied as untrue. . . . “The right of the people to carry and bear arms shall not be infringed.” That is order No. 1, signed by General George Washington. Who shall be obeyed–Order No. 1, as found in the Constitution of the United States, or Order No. 15, issued by Col. H.B. Carrington? . . . The Major General and Colonel aforesaid have a right to prohibit men under their command to purchase arms, lead, &c., but have no more right to prohibit you and I than the Sultan of Turkey.”, April 4, 1863

"that important article of the Constitution giving the people “the right to keep and bear arms” being thus directly and violently set aside.”

The Ashland Union, “the bill provides that these provost Marshals may take and keep all arms that may be found in the hands of individuals, that important article of the Constitution giving the people “the right to keep and bear arms” being thus directly and violently set aside.”, March 4, 1863

5-21-1861: “but the Constitution, which guarantees to every man the right to keep and bear arms, is to be trampled under foot, and his house pillaged, or his arms wrested from his hands."

Weekly Standard, “but the Constitution, which guarantees to every man the right to keep and bear arms, is to be trampled under foot, and his house pillaged, or his arms wrested from his hands. But the Governor of this State has issued his proclamation assuring his citizens that they shall have protection against the last named usurpation.”, May 21, 1862

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

Gov. Henry T. Clark: “Any attempt to seize the arms of our citizens is directly at variance with the Constitution . . . these agents have no lawful authority to seize your private arms and you will be protected in preserving the means of self-defence"

Gov. Henry T. Clark, “Any attempt to seize the arms of our citizens is directly at variance with the Constitution . . . But while I notify you that these agents have no lawful authority to seize your private arms and you will be protected in preserving the means of self-defence . . . “, May 1, 1862

“He has abridged “the freedom of speech and of the press”–”the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” . . . What right of the citizen is he restrained from violating?”

Clarksville Chronicle, “He has abridged “the freedom of speech and of the press”–”the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” . . . What right of the citizen is he restrained from violating?”, Oct. 4, 1861

"What are constitutions and laws worth when they can be thus set at defiance? and what must be the character of a people who sanction such unwarranted usurpations?”

Nashville Union And American, “The Constitution of the United States provides that “THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED,” yet General Fremont boldly proclaims to the people of Missouri that “all persons who shall be taken with arms in their hands” within certain described lines, “shall be tried by a court martial, and if found guilty, SHALL BE SHOT.” What are constitutions and laws worth when they can be thus set at defiance? and what must be the character of a people who sanction such unwarranted usurpations?”, Sept. 11, 1861

“It is the duty of all owners of slaves to be rigid and systematic in their own police regulations over them . . . The carrying of arms by them should not be allowed under any circumstances.”

Newbern Weekly Progress, “It is the duty of all owners of slaves to be rigid and systematic in their own police regulations over them . . . The carrying of arms by them should not be allowed under any circumstances.”, Aug. 20, 1861

Declaration Of Independence Of The State of Missouri, “By armed force and actual bloodshed, he has even attempted to deprive the people of their right to keep and bear arms”

Gov. Claiborne F. Jackson, Declaration Of Independence Of The State of Missouri, “By armed force and actual bloodshed, he has even attempted to deprive the people of their right to keep and bear arms”, Aug. 5, 1861

8-7-1861: “arms owned by members of the family—bought with their own money, or the gifts of friends or relatives—have been deliberately stolen by the soldiers or sbirri of the Government at Washington"

The Daily Exchange, “arms owned by members of the family—bought with their own money, or the gifts of friends or relatives—have been deliberately stolen by the soldiers or sbirri of the Government at Washington—and this, too, in open defiance of that other article of the Constitution which declares that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”, Aug. 7, 1861

Monday, January 12, 2015

8-6-1861: "Our people are denied the right secured to them in their own constitution and the Constitution of the United States; yet we hear no complaints here of violations of the Constitution in that respect.”

U.S. Senator [and soon to be President] Andrew Johnson, “declare that “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Our people are denied the right secured to them in their own constitution and the Constitution of the United States; yet we hear no complaints here of violations of the Constitution in that respect.”, Aug. 6, 1861

7-19-1861: “A bill to regulate and enforce the writ of habeas corpus, and for the better securing the liberty of the citizen. . . . Also, a bill to secure to the people the right to keep and to bear arms for their defence.”

Thirty-Seventh Congress—Special Session, “A bill to regulate and enforce the writ of habeas corpus, and for the better securing the liberty of the citizen. . . . Also, a bill to secure to the people the right to keep and to bear arms for their defence.”, July 19, 1861

“The right of keeping and bearing arms is taken away. . . . Our constitutional rights and privileges–all the immunities that distinguish free men from slaves, being thus wantonly overturned”

Daily Nashville Patriot, “The right of keeping and bearing arms is taken away. . . . Our constitutional rights and privileges–all the immunities that distinguish free men from slaves, being thus wantonly overturned”, July 19, 1861

U.S. Senator John C. Breckinridge and U.S. Rep. Henry Burnett, "and to the violation of the right to keep and bear arms, as so many successive steps towards the military despotism"

U.S. Senator John C. Breckinridge and U.S. Rep. Henry Burnett, “To declare that Congress, by a joint resolution, can indemnify the President for any action he has taken is to give the President a precedent that he may always follow. I deny that Congress can use the Constitution either as a means of encroachment or of indemnification. . . . infringements on the rights of the people, on their property, on their papers, on their right to bear arms. He said that should the resolution pass, the country would stalk on giant strides fast towards a military despotism. . . . and to the violation of the right to keep and bear arms, as so many successive steps towards the military despotism which would be the inevitable result if this war was persisted in.”, July 16, 1861

7-3-1861: "The constitutional right of the people to keep and bear arms—not bird-guns merely, but arms of offence and defence—is clear and undeniable—arms of precision"

The Daily Exchange, “Chief among these are— . . . The right to keep and bear arms of any sort—which right says the Constitution shall not be infringed. . . . The constitutional right of the people to keep and bear arms—not bird-guns merely, but arms of offence and defence—is clear and undeniable—arms of precision, as they are sometimes called”, July 3, 1861

“Every act of oppression is a seed of retribution, and God cares for the right. . . . We have the right to keep and bear arms; but they have been taken away and confiscated. . . . on the tyrant’s plea of “a military necessity,”

The Daily Exchange, “Every act of oppression is a seed of retribution, and God cares for the right. . . . We have the right to keep and bear arms; but they have been taken away and confiscated. . . . on the tyrant’s plea of “a military necessity,””, June 28, 1861

U.S. Senator [And later President] Andrew Johnson: “We ask that we may have means to defend ourselves, under that clause of the constitution which provides that every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms.”

U.S. Senator [And later President] Andrew Johnson, “We ask that we may have means to defend ourselves, under that clause of the constitution which provides that every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms.”, June 27, 1861

6-12-1861: “let us watch with zealous care lest that Constitutional Liberty, without which the Union were a worthless thing, indeed, be wrested from us and trampled under foot..."

Clearfield Republican, “let us watch with zealous care lest that Constitutional Liberty, without which the Union were a worthless thing, indeed, be wrested from us and trampled under foot by the very men to whom we trust that holy birthright of our citizenship.”, June 12, 1861

MUST READ ARTICLE from May 27, 1861: "It can never be necessary or proper to break the law for the purpose of maintaining it—to commit a crime in order to prevent one.”

The Daily Exchange, “we have been, in effect, told that we are not a free State— that we shall not have a militia unless a federal General approves of it, and that if we dare attempt to “keep and bear arms,” it will be treated as an act of hostility against the general government. . . . The outrages upon us are justified by the plea of public necessity, to which tyrants always resort . . . Constitutions were made for our protection against precisely such dangers as now threaten us. They were intended for our security at such moments as these, when popular passion is let loose, and power assails us on the ground of military necessity. It can never be necessary or proper to break the law for the purpose of maintaining it—to commit a crime in order to prevent one.”, May 27, 1861

Sunday, January 11, 2015

June 17, 1857, Gerrit Smith: “They did not say, “The right of the people except slaves,” but “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

“lawyer asked Judge Gildersleeve, who has handled firearms enough in his time to know something about them, to examine the revolver. The Judge did so…”

The [New York] Sun, “lawyer asked Judge Gildersleeve, who has handled firearms enough in his time to know something about them, to examine the revolver. The Judge did so…”, Sept. 19, 1879

“Does Your Gun Shoot Well enough to suit you, would you like to exchange your Single Barrel Gun for a Double Barrel Gun, Automatic, or Pump Gun”

The Ocala Evening Star, B. Goldman Ad; “Does Your Gun Shoot Well enough to suit you, would you like to exchange your Single Barrel Gun for a Double Barrel Gun, Automatic, or Pump Gun”, Dec. 9, 1913

Saturday, January 10, 2015

Dodge City, 1-4-1883: “A number of stock men some time ago announced that they would not keep men in their employ who carried arms. It was predicted that they would soon be hunting for men”

Dodge City Times, “A number of stock men some time ago announced that they would not keep men in their employ who carried arms. It was predicted that they would soon be hunting for men”, Jan. 4, 1883

[N.Y.C.] “Sergeant Little, of the Seventeenth Precinct . . . “I don’t know what they are but they keep quiet and carry their arms openly and we can’t touch them, for they don’t violate any law."

New-York Tribune, “Sergeant Little, of the Seventeenth Precinct, said that he had heard men drill in a basement of a gin mill in Sixth-st., and added: “I don’t know what they are but they keep quiet and carry their arms openly and we can’t touch them, for they don’t violate any law. If they concealed the rifles we would arrest them.”, May 15, 1886

5-13-1869: "there are no laws of the State preventing any negro from keeping or carrying fire-arms, &c., or forfeiting them if kept"

The Weekly Clarion, “and the act forbidding the carrying of arms without license . . . were repealed by the same Legislature that passed them. . . . there are no laws of the State preventing any negro from keeping or carrying fire-arms, &c., or forfeiting them if kept”, May 13, 1869

5-21-1861: “The public should understand that neither slaves or free negroes are, under any circumstances, allowed to keep or carry fire-arms of any description.”

The Western Democrat, “The public should understand that neither slaves or free negroes are, under any circumstances, allowed to keep or carry fire-arms of any description.”, May 21, 1861

Judge Robert Pierpont: “Every person has a right to keep and to bear arms for that purpose; and his making known that he kept them for that purpose, is a circumstance in his favor.”

Judge Robert Pierpont, “Every person has a right to keep and to bear arms for that purpose; and his making known that he kept them for that purpose, is a circumstance in his favor.”, April 2, 1852

“to advise and encourage my countrymen to keep their arms; because that is their inalienable right, which no act of Parliament, no proclamation, can take away from them.”

The Daily Crescent, “to advise and encourage my countrymen to keep their arms; because that is their inalienable right, which no act of Parliament, no proclamation, can take away from them.”, Sept. 18, 1848

“that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms” should fall into disuse, and thereby the bankocracy be better secured from revolution, consequent upon future infringements of the liberties of the people”

The Kalida Venture, “that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms” should fall into disuse, and thereby the bankocracy be better secured from revolution, consequent upon future infringements of the liberties of the people”, April 11, 1848

Friday, January 09, 2015

Chief Justice John Bannister Gibson: “A man has a right to keep whatever arms he pleases . . . This is a freeman’s privilege."

   “A man has a right to keep whatever arms he pleases in his house, and to introduce men to use them. And he can take them when he pleases, whether he apprehends danger or not. This is a freeman’s privilege. Any man who cannot arrest another in the perpetration of a felony, has a right to take his life, as a measure of necessity.”–Chief Justice John Bannister Gibson, Pennsylvania Supreme Court [Indiana State Sentinel, Indianapolis, January 2, 1845. Volume IV – Number 28. Pg. 4]
   The Chief Justice had also stated:
    "Now, in questions of this sort, precedents ought to go for absolutely nothing. The constitution is a collection of fundamental laws, not to be departed from in practice nor altered by judicial decision, and in the construction of it, nothing would be so alarming as the doctrine of communis error, which offers a ready justification for every usurpation that has not been resisted in limine. Instead, therefore, of resting on the fact, that the right in question has universally been assumed by the American courts, the judge who asserts it ought to be prepared to maintain it on the principles of the constitution."--Chief Justice John Bannister Gibson, in dissent in Eakin v. Raub, 12 Sergeant and Rawle 330, Pennsylvania 1825.

Gov. Wilson Shannon: “It is the right of suffrage and the right to bear arms, which principally distinguishes the freeman from the slave.”

Gov. Wilson Shannon, “It is the right of suffrage and the right to bear arms, which principally distinguishes the freeman from the slave.”, Dec. 8, 1840

6-24-1840: “but its constant policy has been, that every freeman in America should be armed and equipped in order that he may at all times prepared to defend his country and his liberty.”

The North-Carolina Standard, “but its constant policy has been, that every freeman in America should be armed and equipped in order that he may at all times prepared to defend his country and his liberty.”, June 24, 1840

11-1-1881: "and when they declared that the right of American citizens to bear arms should not be infringed, they meant just what they said"

The Rock Island Argus, “the enactment of this law, was secretly inspired by the influence of tory minds and flunkey hearts as a means to an end, and that end was the ultimate disarming of the American people . . . the right of owning an article implies the right of carrying the same . . . and when they declared that the right of American citizens to bear arms should not be infringed, they meant just what they said“, Nov. 1, 1881

6-22-1881: “As the constitutions generally say that the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed, it seems to be established that laws cannot be passed to forbid men from carrying firearms.”

The Abbeville Press And Banner, “As the constitutions generally say that the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed, it seems to be established that laws cannot be passed to forbid men from carrying firearms.”, June 22, 1881

11-17-1865: “hence their “right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed . . . No Federal Court can refuse to protect them in this right.”

The Indianapolis Daily Herald, “hence their “right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed . . . No Federal Court can refuse to protect them in this right.”, Nov. 17, 1865

11-6-1865: “and men were arrested if they violated these lawless orders, notwithstanding the Constitution declares the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. All security to person and property was gone.”

The Indianapolis Daily Herald, “and men were arrested if they violated these lawless orders, notwithstanding the Constitution declares the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. All security to person and property was gone.”, Nov. 6, 1865

Thomas Jefferson to [U.S. Representative, Diplomat & First U.S. Marshal of New York] William S. Smith, “Let them take arms.”

William S. Smith, U.S. Representative, Diplomat and First
U.S. Marshal of New York.
Thomas Jefferson to William S. Smith*
Paris, Nov. 13, 1787
   DEAR SIR, — I am now to acknoledge the receipt of your favors of October the 4th, 8th, & 26th. In the last you apologise for your letters of introduction to Americans coming here. It is so far from needing apology on your part, that it calls for thanks on mine. I endeavor to shew civilities to all the Americans who come here, & will give me opportunities of doing it: and it is a matter of comfort to know from a good quarter what they are, & how far I may go in my attentions to them. Can you send me Woodmason’s bills for the two copying presses for the M. de la Fayette, & the M. de Chastellux? The latter makes one article in a considerable account, of old standing, and which I cannot present for want of this article. — I do not know whether it is to yourself or Mr. Adams I am to give my thanks for the copy of the new constitution. I beg leave through you to place them where due. It will be yet three weeks before I shall receive them from America. There are very good articles in it: & very bad. I do not know which preponderate. What we have lately read in the history of Holland, in the chapter on the Stadtholder, would have sufficed to set me against a chief magistrate eligible for a long duration, if I had ever been disposed towards one: & what we have always read of the elections of Polish kings should have forever excluded the idea of one continuable for life. Wonderful is the effect of impudent & persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, & what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts?* And can history produce an instance of rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, & always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusetts: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen-yard in order. I hope in God this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted. — You ask me if any thing transpires here on the subject of S. America? Not a word. I know that there are combustible materials there, and that they wait the torch only. But this country probably will join the extinguishers. — The want of facts worth communicating to you has occasioned me to give a little loose to dissertation. We must be contented to amuse, when we cannot inform.
* – William Stephens Smith, (Nov. 8, 1755 – June 10, 1816), was a United States Representative from New York. He married Abigail “Nabby” Adams, the daughter of President John Adams, and so was a brother-in-law of President John Quincy Adams. He was appointed by President Washington as the First U.S. Marshal of New York.

   Mr. Smith had frequent correspondence with Thomas Jefferson, as well as John Jay, (Dec. 12, 1745 – May 17, 1829), who was an American statesman, Patriot, diplomat, one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, signer of the Treaty of Paris, and first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, (1789–95).
   Born in New York on November 8, 1755, Smith graduated from the College of New Jersey (Princeton) in 1774 before entering the practice of law. But before he could establish himself as a lawyer, the Revolutionary War interrupted his career. He entered the service in August 1776 as a major, serving as an aide to General Sullivan. That same month, he fought at the battle of Long Island. When the Americans withdrew, he was among the last to leave, accompanying General Washington on the latter’s barge across the East River. He was wounded in the fighting at Harlem Heights, which did not prevent him from helping destroy a bridge at Throgs Neck, thereby preventing the British General Howe from out-flanking the American forces. He fought again at White Plains and accompanied the American retreat across New Jersey. His gallantry at the battle of Trenton earned him a promotion to the rank of lieutenant colonel. He also fought at the battles of Monmouth Courthouse and Newport. Afterwards, he became an inspector and adjutant in a corps of light infantry under the command of the famous French general, the Marquis de Lafayette. Washington appointed Smith his aide in July 1781.
   Smith performed valuable services for the Commander-in-Chief at Yorktown. After the war, he supervised the evacuation of the British from New York in accordance with the treaty of peace.
   In 1785, Smith was appointed the secretary of the American legation in London, where he served under Minister John Adams. A year later, he married his boss’s daughter. His diplomatic career included several missions to Spain and Portugal.
   Smith and his wife returned to the United States in 1788. The following year, when Smith was 33, Washington, appointed him Marshal. Since New York City was the nation’s capital during the first year of the new government, Smith dealt personally with the President in the performance of his duties. He also dined with Washington on many occasions during 1789-90.
   He resigned as Marshal after one year in office to become supervisor of the revenue. Some time later, he took the job of surveyor of the port of New York. These positions, combined with his private business affairs, brought him a degree of wealth. In 1786, for example, he owned $3,800 worth of continental debt certificates. In addition to these activities, Smith was one of the founders of the Society of the Cincinnati.
   When Jefferson assumed the presidency in 1801, Smith surrendered his positions within the federal government and returned to his private pursuits. Early in the new century, he became involved in the Miranda expedition, a poorly planned and illegal filibustering attempt against Venezuela. Although arrested and clearly guilty of the offense, Smith obtained an acquittal. In 1812, he was elected to Congress as a member of the fading Federalist party. He retained his seat until his death on June 10, 1816, at the age of 61. [Source: U.S. Marshals Service.]

9-8-1864: "Lincoln construes that to mean that the Democrats shall not be allowed to purchase or carry arms.”

Plymouth Weekly Democrat, “The Constitution of the United States says “the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.” Lincoln construes that to mean that the Democrats shall not be allowed to purchase or carry arms.”, Sept. 8, 1864

Senator Lucius V. Bierce: "God and nature have given me the right.–No human Constitution or law can take it away.”

Thursday, January 08, 2015

George Washington: "Congress should be pleased to suffer those Men, nonCommissd Officers & Soldiers, to take with them as their own property, & as a Gratuity, the Arms and Accoutrements they now hold“

George Washington to Elias Boudinot, “I must beg the Liberty to suggest to Congress an Idea which has been hinted to me, and which has affected my Mind very forcibly. That is, that at the Discharge of the Men engaged for the War, Congress should be pleased to suffer those Men, nonCommissd Officers & Soldiers, to take with them as their own property, & as a Gratuity, the Arms and Accoutrements they now hold“, April 18, 1783

“The constitution gave the right to every man to carry arms, but that right ceased the very moment he pointed them at the breast of his fellow citizen.”

U.S. Rep. Isaac Holmes, “The constitution gave the right to every man to carry arms, but that right ceased the very moment he pointed them at the breast of his fellow citizen.”, Feb. 24, 1844

3/11/1844: “or who shall discharge any pistol, gun or other fire arms on or near said bridge, so that said bridge might by possibility be fired or injured thereby, he or she so offending”

Laws Of The General Assembly Of The Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania, “or who shall discharge any pistol, gun or other fire arms on or near said bridge, so that said bridge might by possibility be fired or injured thereby, he or she so offending”, March 11, 1844

Wednesday, January 07, 2015

Battles at Breed’s Hill/Bunker Hill, “They were a body of husbandmen, not in uniform, bearing for the most part no other arms than fowling pieces..."

Battles at Breed’s Hill/Bunker Hill, “They were a body of husbandmen, not in uniform, bearing for the most part no other arms than fowling pieces which had no bayonets, and carrying in horns and pouches their stinted supply of powder and bullets.”/”the free negroes of the colony had their representatives. For the right of free negroes to bear arms in the public defence was, at that day, as little disputed in New England as their other rights.”, June 16-17, 1775

Virginia, June 18, 1779: "Arms in possession of a slave contrary to this prohibition shall be forfeited to him who will seize them.”

Virginia, A Bill concerning Slaves, “No slave shall keep any arms whatever, nor pass, unless with written orders from his master or employer, or in his company, with arms from one place to another. Arms in possession of a slave contrary to this prohibition shall be forfeited to him who will seize them.”, June 18, 1779

9-2-1921: “An armed mob is dragging itself over the hills of West Virginia toward blood-stained Mingo county”

Public Ledger, “An armed mob is dragging itself over the hills of West Virginia toward blood-stained Mingo county”, Sept. 2, 1921

“it is a bad bill, and is, we believe, unconstitutional, inasmuch as it would abridge the right of the citizen to own and bear arms.”

The Old Abe Eagle, “it is a bad bill, and is, we believe, unconstitutional, inasmuch as it would abridge the right of the citizen to own and bear arms.”, Jan. 26, 1893

Oct. 1775: Falmouth, Massachusetts, “and demanded of the inhabitants all their arms and ammunition, and four of their citizens as hostages. This order being of course refused . . .”

Falmouth, Massachusetts, “and demanded of the inhabitants all their arms and ammunition, and four of their citizens as hostages. This order being of course refused . . .”, Oct. 1775

Boston 1769: "they urged the compliance of all with an ancient law of the province binding every householder to provide himself with a complete stand of arms”

The Life and Times of General Washington, [1769] “Committee of the Inhabitants of Boston . . . they urged the compliance of all with an ancient law of the province binding every householder to provide himself with a complete stand of arms”, 1835

Tuesday, January 06, 2015

[Pg. 430]
  
   Although the town sent Delegates to the conventions at Leicester, which put forth a list of grievances under which, in their opinion, the country was suffering, it is not known that any citizen of the town was engaged in any of the overt acts which constituted what is called Shays’ Rebellion.
[Pg. 431]
    The fifth day of September [1786] was the day appointed for the sitting of the Court at Worcester; but, on that day, the Court House was surrounded by a mob of two hundred persons, with arms in their hands, who debarred the entrance of the judges. The Chief Justice (Ward) remonstrated in vain, and the Court was compelled to adjourn.

   Dec. 3. The Court House, at Worcester, was again taken possession of by the disaffected. The judges met at The Sun Tavern, but could not proceed to business. The Governor had previous to this issued his orders to the officers of the militia to have their men armed and equipped to take the field at the shortest notice. Troops were called into service at once upon the new outbreak.

   Mass. Arch. Shays’ Rebellion, Vol. 192, p. 155.
[Annals of the Town of Mendon, From 1659 to 1880. Compiled By John G. Metcalf, M.D. Member Of The His. Gen. And American Antiquarian Societies, Etc. Providence, R.I.: E.L. Freeman & Co., Printers To The State. 1880.]

Sept. 17, 1675: "“which arms and ammunition shall be kept and improved for the use and defence of the sd Indians, the owners of them, and of the English among whom they sojourne"

Councill held at Boston, “which arms and ammunition shall be kept and improved for the use and defence of the sd Indians, the owners of them, and of the English among whom they sojourne at Mendon.”, Sept. 17, 1675

“The right, therefore, of a people to bear arms is one of the great safeguards of liberty”

The Government of the United States, “The right, therefore, of a people to bear arms is one of the great safeguards of liberty”, 1892

The Fallacy of the [supposed] ‘Police Power‘, and commercial ‘property rights‘

The Fallacy of the [supposed] ‘Police Power‘, and commercial ‘property rights‘, in the Constitutional Republic of We The People of the United States of America

Monday, January 05, 2015

“The legislature has no power to prescribe how the people shall bear arms . . . I think the people have a right to keep and bear arms as they choose for their own protection.”

Georgia Constitutional Convention Delegate Mr. Robert Augustus Toombs, “The legislature has no power to prescribe how the people shall bear arms–that they shall not carry them in their boots or anywhere else that they want to. I think the people have a right to keep and bear arms as they choose for their own protection.”, July 24, 1877

Maryland 1657: “The results of all this turbulence were the right to carry arms, the practical assertion of the right to make laws and lay taxes, relief from the oath of fealty with the obnoxious clauses”

History For Ready Reference, Maryland 1657: “The results of all this turbulence were the right to carry arms, the practical assertion of the right to make laws and lay taxes, relief from the oath of fealty with the obnoxious clauses”, 1657

1855: “More than a thousand Missourians, armed with deadly weapons and two cannons, were encamped in Kansas . . . Everybody carried arms”

The American Nation, “More than a thousand Missourians, armed with deadly weapons and two cannons, were encamped in Kansas . . . Everybody carried arms”, 1855

"are now entitled, as a matter of right, to be restored to all the rights, political and civil, which they enjoyed before the rebellion, precisely as if they had remained loyal. They are to vote, to hold office, to bear arms, immediately and unconditionally”

[General and soon to be President] Rutherford B. Hayes, “The rebels having laid down their arms and abandoned their attempt to break up the Union, are now entitled, as a matter of right, to be restored to all the rights, political and civil, which they enjoyed before the rebellion, precisely as if they had remained loyal. They are to vote, to hold office, to bear arms, immediately and unconditionally”, 1865

Baltimore Mayor Geo. Wm. Brown: "All citizens having arms suitable for the defense of the city, and which they are willing to contribute for the purpose . . . the number amounted to more than fifteen thousand, about three-fourths armed with muskets, shotguns and pistols.”

Baltimore Mayor Geo. Wm. Brown, “Union men and disunion men appeared on the streets with arms in their hands. . . . All citizens having arms suitable for the defense of the city, and which they are willing to contribute for the purpose . . . the number amounted to more than fifteen thousand, about three-fourths armed with muskets, shotguns and pistols.”, April 19, 1861

Sunday, January 04, 2015

“An Act Establishing Martial Law . . . Further, I exhort the good People of the State, to aid and support, by example and by arms"

Rhode Island Gov. King, “An Act Establishing Martial Law. Be it enacted by the General Assembly, as follows: . . . Further, I exhort the good People of the State, to aid and support, by example and by arms, the civil and military authorities thereof, in pursuing and bringing to condign punishment”, June 26, 1842

“In 1675, when the country was in continual alarm, the frontier towns were exposed to such sudden incursions of the Indians, that the people went armed to publick worship.”

The Monthly Anthology, And Boston Review, “In 1675, when the country was in continual alarm, the frontier towns were exposed to such sudden incursions of the Indians, that the people went armed to publick worship.”, 1809

U.S. Senate, Oct. 7, 1918: “For payment of claims on account of loss of firearms and ammunition taken by the United States troops from civilians in the State of Colorado during the labor strike troubles”

U.S. Senate, “For payment of claims on account of loss of firearms and ammunition taken by the United States troops from civilians in the State of Colorado during the labor strike troubles”, Oct. 7, 1918

The Twelve United Colonies, July 3, 1775: "“yet men trained up to arms from their infancy, and animated by the love of liberty, will not afford a cheap or easy conquest"

The Twelve United Colonies, By Their Delegates In Congress, To The Inhabitants Of Great Britain, “yet men trained up to arms from their infancy, and animated by the love of liberty, will not afford a cheap or easy conquest; of this at least we are assured, that our struggle will be glorious, our success certain, since even in death we shall find that freedom which in life you forbid us to enjoy.”, July 3, 1775

Lysander Spooner, (Expanded): ”These provisions obviously recognize the natural right of all men “to keep and bear arms” for their personal defence; and prohibit both Congress and the State governments from infringing the right of “the people”–that is, of any of the people”

    The following post has been expanded upon, due to the discovery of further material:

The Unconstitutionality Of Slavery by Lysander Spooner, “This right “to keep and bear arms,” implies the right to use them–as much as a provision securing to the people the right to buy and keep food, would imply their right also to eat it.”/”These provisions obviously recognize the natural right of all men “to keep and bear arms” for their personal defence; and prohibit both Congress and the State governments from infringing the right of “the people”–that is, of any of the people”, 1847 (Enlarged Edition: 1853)

Saturday, January 03, 2015

Texas, 1859: “That to prevent the citizen from carrying arms would be a violation of the Constitution itself, for that guarantees to every citizen the right to carry arms in his own defence.”

Texas State House Of Representatives, “That to prevent the citizen from carrying arms would be a violation of the Constitution itself, for that guarantees to every citizen the right to carry arms in his own defence.”, Nov. 21, 1859

“every other right and privilege of the Constitution and of the common law remains intact, including the right to resist the wrong-doer or trespasser..."

Friday, January 02, 2015

“The citizen has the right to keep and bear arms, and he should not be required to go to the statute b00k to ascertain when and where he can exercise it; but the law should be so framed as to protect him in the right guaranteed by the Constitution”

Texas State Senator Peyton F. Edwards for Minority, “The citizen has the right to keep and bear arms, and he should not be required to go to the statute b00k to ascertain when and where he can exercise it; but the law should be so framed as to protect him in the right guaranteed by the Constitution”, May 8, 1876

“And incorporated in the very fundamentals of every Constitution, of every State in this glorious Union, was sacredly preserved the right of the citizen to bear arms and to bear arms carried with them”

Judge Francis H. Woods, “And incorporated in the very fundamentals of every Constitution, of every State in this glorious Union, was sacredly preserved the right of the citizen to bear arms and to bear arms carried with them”, Oct. 8, 1889

1884: “And that the citizens may familiarize themselves with their use, it is the constitutional right of every citizen to keep such weapons"

The Code of Tennessee, “And that the citizens may familiarize themselves with their use, it is the constitutional right of every citizen to keep such weapons in times of peace; to purchase them; to provide himself with ammunition; to keep arms in order and repair; to practice with them, and to use them for all ordinary purposes, and in all the ordinary modes usual in the country and to which such arms are adapted”, 1884

Oregon 1887: “§ 3172. No officer, civil or military, or other person, shall take from or demand of the owner any fire-arms”

The Codes And General Laws Of Oregon, “§ 3172. No officer, civil or military, or other person, shall take from or demand of the owner any fire-arms”, 1887

Johns Hopkins University, 1892: "The right declared was meant to be a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers, and as a necessary and efficient means of regaining rights when temporarily overturned by usurpation."

An Introduction to the Study of the Constitution, “The right declared was meant to be a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers, and as a necessary and efficient means of regaining rights when temporarily overturned by usurpation.”, 1892