Marriage License, Permission to MARRY?

>>
Go apply for a (corporate) state marriage license.
Get married.
Have a child.
You decide to take the child home with out the hospitals permission because ya didn’t allow them to vaccinate him, and/or you did not want to get a social security number or birth certificate, for the little one just yet, or they (future) wanted to implant an identification chip in the child.
You get home, put the child to bed, sit to enjoy the first night home with your new family and you hear a knock on the door and the Sheriff greats you with a stern look and says; “Buba please turn and put your hands behind your head, you are under arrest.                              ((Parentspotria))
And you say; “what fer.”
Officer says; “It has been reported that you have taken the state property from the hospital without permission.”
And you say; “state property, all I picked up today was my wife and new born son.”
Officer says; “where is what you claim as ‘your ‘ son.”

The above is a general example of true stories in every state of the union.  If you do not believe it just do the above and call me on the results.

Yes, with a marriage license you just told the government that you are seeking their aid, government can then presume you are incompetent to handle the property produced from the union (marriage).  Ya just contracted your rights away and you did not have a clue to what you where doing.

You just granted the authority of the state over all produce of the new couple that has now become one.
Welcome to being subject to all statutes to address every conceivable issue your marriage could ever possible encounter.

Yes the child is now ‘state property’ of (____________) and ‘you’ are charged with caring for him as ‘they’ see fit.

Now if the franchise (state) see you spank Johnny, the force of the state will be upon you to the magnitude of a 1000 man Nazi regime, ya can run but ya can not hide.

Oh I forgot to say, If you would of just got married (contractually committed to each other) before your family, friends and God, as is your ‘right, liberty’, (man and Gods Law) the ‘corporate’ state would have virtually no jurisdiction unless you violate Johnny’s ‘God given rights’.  God says; “spank him when needed, least ye raise a
brat.” PHRS

California Proposed Bill – “According to AB 2943, a Parent who spanks their child would be placed on probation for a minimum of four years, and would be forced to attend a ‘nonviolent parental education class’ and the child would receive a criminal court protective order ‘protecting the victim from further acts of violence or threats’ and ‘residence exclusion or stay-away conditions’.”

State ownership of children, which is no more than the collective will of the people – as “a force for good” and “shadow minister for families”.   We are government and we are here to help you, as the gun is pointed at you for your safety.

The state may someday force you to educate in specific vocational set standards.
The state may start forcing vaccinations that may do great future damage.
The state decides all issues in separation, alimony, child support.  (I would much
rather trust a (preselected) [your church] arbitration forum or a jury to decide such
instead of a pro state judge.)
The state can force perverse teaching on your children.  (Same sex marriages,
homosexuality, etc.  (Just study history, the/a state can get pretty sick.)
The Bible says; “raise up a child in the ways of the Lord and he shall not depart from it.”
The state says; “raise up the child in the ways of the state and he shall not depart from it.”
>>
Rocked by a nationwide storm of criticism, the Los Angeles County court that declared homeschooling illegal in California has agreed to rehear the case in June 2008. At issue is Justice H. Walter Croskey’s Feb. 28 decree, which ordered the parents of “Rachel L.” to send her away to a public or private school, where she can get a “legal education.”
>>

1. The definition of a “license” demands that we not obtain one to marry. Black’s Law Dictionary defines “license” as, “The permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission, would be illegal.”  We need to ask ourselves- why should it be illegal to marry without the State’s permission? More importantly, why should we need the State’s permission to participate in something which God instituted (Gen. 2:18-24)? We should not need the State’s permission to marry nor should we grovel before state officials to seek it. What if you apply and the State says “no”? You must understand that the authority to license implies the power to
prohibit. A license by definition “confers a right” to do something. The State cannot grant the right to marry. It is a God-given right.

2. When you marry with a marriage license, you grant the State jurisdiction over your marriage. When you marry with a marriage license, your marriage is a creature of the State. It is a corporation of the State! Therefore, they have jurisdiction over your marriage including the fruit of your marriage. What is the fruit of your marriage? Your children and every piece of property you own (that is produced after the corporate marr age was created). There is plenty of case law in American jurisprudence which declares this to be true.

In 1993, parents were upset here in Wisconsin because a test was being administered to their children in the government schools which was very invasive of the family’s privacy. When parents complained, they were shocked by the school bureaucrats who informed them that their children were required to take the test by law and that they would have to take the test because they (the government school) had jurisdiction over their children. When parents asked the bureaucrats what gave them jurisdiction, the bureaucrats answered, “your marriage license and their birth certificates.” Judicially, and in increasing fashion, practically, your state marriage license has far-reaching implications.

3. When you marry with a marriage license, you place yourself under a body of law which is immoral. By obtaining a marriage license, you place yourself under the jurisdiction of Family Court which is governed by unbiblical and immoral laws (state statute). Under these laws, you can divorce for any reason. Often, the courts side with the spouse who is in rebellion to God, and castigates the spouse who remains faithful by ordering him or her not to speak about the Bible or other matters of faith when present with the children.

As a minister, I cannot in good conscience perform a marriage which would place people under this immoral body of laws. I also cannot marry someone with a marriage license because to do so I have to act as an agent of the State!  I would have to sign the marriage license, and I would have to mail it into the State. Given the State’s demand to usurp the place of God and family regarding marriage, and given it’s unbiblical, immoral laws to govern marriage, it would be an act of treason for me to do so.

4. The marriage license invades and removes God-given parental authority. When you read the Bible, you see that God intended for children to have their father’s blessing regarding whom they married. Daughters were to be given in marriage by their fathers (Dt. 22:16; Ex. 22:17; I Cor. 7:38). We have a vestige of this in our culture today in that the father takes his daughter to the front of the altar and the minister asks, “Who gives this woman to be married to this man?”  ((In time past the ceremony would ask if anyone is present to object to the union of the couple, this portion is now days rare.  Essentially the community had the 15 days as stated below to insure that close relatives were not marrying, or one that is not already married was involved, plus I assume other valid reasons.))

Historically, there was no requirement to obtain a marriage license in colonial America. When you read the laws of the colonies and then the states, you see only two requirements for marriage. First, you had to obtain your parents permission to marry, and second, you had to post public notice of the marriage 5-15 days before the ceremony.

Notice you had to obtain your parents permission. Back then you saw godly government displayed in that the State recognized the parents authority by demanding that the parents permission be obtained. Today, the all-encompassing ungodly State demands that their permission be obtained to marry.

By issuing marriage licenses, the State is saying, “You don’t need your parents permission, you need our permission.” If parents are opposed to their child’s marrying a certain person and refuse to give their permission, the child can do an end run around the parents authority by obtaining the State’s permission, and marry anyway.
This is an invasion and removal of God-given parental authority by the State.

5. When you marry with a marriage license, you are like a polygamist. From the State’s point of view, when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, but you are also marrying (contracting with) the State.

The most blatant declaration of this fact that I have ever found is a brochure entitled “With This Ring I Thee Wed.” It is found in county courthouses across Ohio where people go to obtain their marriage licenses. It is published by the Ohio State Bar Association. The opening paragraph under the subtitle “Marriage Vows” states,
“Actually, when you repeat your marriage vows you enter into a legal contract. There are three parties to thatcontract. 1.You; 2. Your husband or wife, as the case may be; and 3. the State of Ohio.”

See, the State and the lawyers know that when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, you are marrying the State! You are like a polygamist! You are not just making a vow to your spouse, but you are making a vow to the State and your spouse.  You are also giving undue jurisdiction to the State.

When Does the State Have Jurisdiction Over a Marriage?

God intended the State to have jurisdiction over a marriage for two reasons – 1). in the case of divorce, and 2).
when crimes are committed i.e., adultery, bigamy. etc. Unfortunately, the State now allows divorce for any reason, and it does not prosecute for adultery.

In either case, divorce or crime, a marriage license is not necessary for the courts to determine whether a marriage existed or not. What is needed are witnesses. This is why you have a best man and a maid of honor.
They should sign the marriage certificate in your family Bible, and the wedding day guest book should be kept.

Marriage was instituted by God, therefore it is a God-given right. According to Scripture, it is to be governed by the family, and the State only has jurisdiction in the cases of divorce or crime.  ((Essentially the state can get involved in divorce (with out no state liscense) because they have jurisdiction to insure that the parties adhere to their standing marriage  [common law contract] promise, just like any other contract the court steps in an enforces the terms of the agreement.  So I Hansen recommend a well prayed out agreement that can be refereed to frequently by both parties of their promise before man and God, and if worst comes to worst the parties can call upon the court to use its authority to enforce the terms therein.)) ((Basically a court has two ways of gaining jurisdiction: a. Called upon to enforce a contract. b. Violation of a parties rights [enforcement of general law].))

Historically, all the states in America had laws outlawing the marriage of blacks and whites. In the mid-1800’s, certain states began allowing interracial marriages or miscegenation as long as those marrying received a license from the state. In other words they had to receive permission to do an act which without such permission would have been illegal.

Blacks Law Dictionary points to this historical fact when it defines “marriage license” as, “A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who intend to intermarry.” “Intermarry” is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary
as, “Miscegenation; mixed or interracial marriages.”

Give the State an inch and they will take a 100 miles (or as one elderly woman once said to me “10,000 miles.”)
Not long after these licenses were issued, some states began requiring all people who marry to obtain a marriage license. In 1923, the Federal Government established the Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act (they later established the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act). By 1929, every corporate state had adopted marriage license laws.

What Should We Do?

Christian couples should not be marrying with State marriage licenses, nor should ministers be marrying people with State marriage licenses. Some have said to me, “If someone is married without a marriage license, then they aren’t really married.” Given the fact that states may soon legalize same-sex marriages, we need to ask
ourselves, “If a man and a man marry with a State marriage license, and a man and woman marry without a State marriage license – who’s really married? Is it the two men with a marriage license, or the man and woman without a marriage license? In reality, this contention that people are not really married unless they obtain a
marriage license simply reveals how Statist we are in our thinking. We need to think biblically.  (As for homosexuals marrying, outlaw sodomy as God’s law demands, and there will be no threat of sodomites marrying.)

You should not have to obtain a license from the State to marry someone anymore than you should have to obtain a license from the State to be a parent, which some in academic and legislative circles are currently pushing to be made law.

When I marry a couple, I always buy them a Family Bible which contains birth and death records, and a marriage “record”. We record the marriage in the Family Bible. What’s recorded in a Family Bible will stand up as legal evidence in any court of law in America. Early Americans were married without a marriage license. They simply recorded their marriages in their Family Bibles. So should we.

(Pastor Trewhella has been marrying couples without marriage licenses for ten years. Many other pastors also refuse to marry couples with State marriage licenses.)

This pamphlet is not comprehensive in scope.  Rather, the purpose of this pamphlet is to make you think and give you a starting point to do further study of your own. If you would like an audio sermon regarding this matter, just send a gift of at least five dollars in cash to: Mercy Seat Christian Church 10240 W. National Ave.

PMB #129 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53227.    www.mercyseat.net)\

by Virgil Cooper
ultrac21@whitemtns.com

Enlightening Conversation with a Marriage License Bureau. . . .

About 15 years ago, my former wife of 26  years, filed for
divorce. We had seven (7) children: five (5) daughters and two
(2) sons.  Our youngest at the time, our second son, was five
years old.  At the time, I prepared a counterclaim to the Petition
for Dissolution her attorney filed in Domestic Relations (DR) court.

I met one afternoon with the head of the Maricopa County Superior
Court, Marriage License Bureau, in downtown Phoenix. The marriage
license bureau was headed by a young woman of about age 25.  I asked
her to explain to me the general and statutory implications of
the marriage license.  She was very cooperative, and called in
an Assistant, a tall Black man who at the time was working on an
Operations Manual for internal departmental use.

She deferred for most technical explanations to her Assistant.
He walked through the technicalities of the marriage license as
it operates in Arizona.  He mentioned that marriage licensing is
pretty much the same in the other states –but there are differences.
One significant difference he mentioned was that Arizona is one of
eight western states that are Community Property states.  The other
states are Common Law states, including Utah, with the exception of
Louisiana which is a Napoleonic Code state.

He then explained some of the technicalities of the marriage
license. He said, first of all, the marriage license is Secular
Contract between the parties and the State.  The State is the
principal party in that Secular Contract.  The husband and wife are
secondary or inferior parties.  The Secular Contract is a three-way
contract between the State, as Principal, and the husband and wife
as the other two legs of the Contract.

He said, in the traditional sense a marriage is a covenant between
the husband and wife and God.  But in the Secular Contract with
the state, reference to God is a dotted line, and NOT officially
considered included in the Secular Contract at all.

He said, if the husband and wife wish to include God as a party in
their marriage, that is a “dotted line” they will have to add in
their own minds.  The state’s marriage license is “strictly secular,”
he said.  He said further, that what he meant by the relationship to
God being a “dotted line” meant that the State regards any mention
of God as irrelevant, even meaningless.

In his description of the marriage license contract, the related
one other “dotted line.”  He said in the traditional religious
context, marriage was a covenant between the husband and wife and
God with husband and wife joined as one. This is not the case in
the secular realm of the state’s marriage license contract. The
State is the Principal or dominant party.  The husband and wife
are merely contractually “joined” as business partners, not in any
religious union. They may even be considered, he said, connected
to each other by another “dotted line.”

The picture he was trying to “paint” was that of a triangle with
the State at the top and a solid line extending from the apex,
the State, down the left side to the husband, and a separate solid
line extending down the right side to the wife, a “dotted line”
merely showing that they consider themselves to have entered into
a religious union of some sort that is irrelevant to the State.

Marriage License
Secular Contract Diagram

STATE
(primary party)

HUSBAND                  WIFE   .
(secondary party) (secondary party) .

GOD
He further mentioned that this “religious overtone” is recognized by
the State by requiring that the marriage must be solemnized either
by a state official or by a minister of religion that has been
“deputized” by the State to perform the marriage ceremony and make
a return of the signed and executed marriage license to the State.

Again, he emphasized that marriage is a strictly secular relationship
so far as the State is concerned and because it is looked upon as a
“privileged business enterprise” various tax advantages and other
political privileges have become attached to the marriage license
contract that have nothing at all to do with marriage as a religious
covenant or bond between God and a man and a woman.

By way of reference, if you would like to read a legal treatise on
marriage, one of the best is “Principles of Community Property,”
by William Defuniak.  At the outset, he explains that Community
Property law descends from Roman Civil Law through the Spanish Codes,
600 A.D., written by the Spanish juris consults.

In the civil law, the marriage is considered to be a for-profit
venture or profit-making venture (even though it may never actually
produce a profit in operation) and as the wife goes out to the
local market to purchase food stuffs and other supplies for the
marriage household, she is replenishing the stocks of the business.
To restate: In the civil law, the marriage is considered to be a
business venture, that is, a for-profit business venture.  Moreover,
as children come into the marriage household, the business venture
is considered to have “borne fruit.”

Now, back to the explanation by the Maricopa County Superior
Court, Marriage Bureau’s administrative Assistant.  He went on to
explain that every contract must have consideration.  The State
offers consideration in the form of the actual license itself –
the piece of paper, the Certificate of Marriage.  The other part
of consideration by the State is “the privilege to be regulated by
statute.” He added that this privilege to be regulated by statute
includes all related statutes, and all court cases as they are ruled
on by the courts, and all statutes and regulations into the future
in the years following the commencement of the marriage.  He said
in a way the marriage license contract is a dynamic or flexible,
ever-changing contract as time goes along – even though the husband
and wife didn’t realize that.

My thought on this is can it really be considered a true contract
as one becomes aware of the failure by the State to make full
disclosure of the terms and conditions.  A contract must be
entered into knowingly, intelligently, intentionally, and with
fully informed consent.  Otherwise, technically there is no contract.

Another way to look as the marriage license contract with the State
is as a contract of adhesion, a contract between two disparate,
unequal parties. Again, a flawed “contract.”  Such a contract with
the State is said to be a “specific performance” contract as to
the privileges, duties and responsibilities that attach.

Consideration on the part of the husband and wife is the actual fee
paid and the implied agreement to be subject to the state’s statutes,
rules, and regulations and all court cases ruled on related to
marriage law, family law, children, and property.  He emphasized
that this contractual consideration by the bride and groom places
them in a definite and defined-by-law position inferior and subject
to the State.  He commented that very few people realize this.

He also said that it is very important to understand that children
born to the marriage are considered by law as “the contract bearing
fruit” -meaning the children primarily belong to the State, even
though the law never comes out and says so in so many words.

In this regard, children born to the contract regarded as “the
contract bearing fruit,” he said it is vitally important for
parents to understand two doctrines that became established in
the United States during the 1930s.  The first is the Doctrine of
Parens Patriae.  The second is the Doctrine of In Loco Parentis.

Parens Patriae means literally “the parent of the country” or to
state it more bluntly – the State is the undisclosed true parent.
Along this line, a 1930s Arizona Supreme Court case states that
parents have no property right in their children, and have custody of
their children during good behavior at the sufferance of the State.
This means that parents may raise their children and maintain custody
of their children as long as they don’t offend the State, but if they
in some manner displease the State, the State can step in at any
time and exercise its superior status and take custody and control
of its children – the parents are only conditional caretakers.
[Thus the Doctrine of In Loco Parentis.]

He also added a few more technical details.  The marriage license
is an ongoing contractual relationship with the State.  Technically,
the marriage license is a business license allowing the husband and
wife, in the name of the marriage, to enter into contracts with third
parties and contract mortgages and debts.  They can get car loans,
home mortgages, and installment debts in the name of the marriage
because it is not only a secular enterprise, but it is looked upon by
the State as a privileged business enterprise as well as a for-profit
business enterprise.  The marriage contract acquires property through
out its existence and over time, it is hoped, increases in value.

Also, the marriage contract “bears fruit” by adding children.
If sometime later, the marriage fails, and a “divorce” results
the contract continues in existence. The “divorce” is merely a
contractual dissolution or amendment of the terms and conditions
of the contract.  Jurisdiction of the State over the marriage,
over the husband and wife, now separated, continues and continues
over all aspects of the marriage, over marital property and over
children brought into the marriage.

That is why family law and the Domestic Relations court calls
“divorce” a dissolution of the marriage because the contract
continues in operation but in amended or modified form.  He also
pointed out that the marriage license contract is one of the
strongest, most binding contractual relationships the State has
on people.

At the end of our hour-long meeting, I somewhat humorously asked
if other people had come in and asked the questions I was asking?
The Assistant replied that in the several years he had worked
there, he was not aware of anyone else asking these questions.
He added that he was very glad to see someone interested in the
legal implications of the marriage license and the contractual
relationship it creates with the State.

His boss, the young woman Marriage Bureau department head stated,
“You have to understand that people who come in here to get a
marriage license are in heat.  The last thing they want to know is
technical, legal and statutory implications of the marriage license.”

I hope this is helpful information to anyone interested in
getting more familiar with the contractual implications of the
marriage license.  The marriage license as we know it didn’t
come into existence until after the Civil War and didn’t become
standard practice in all the states until after 1900, becoming
firmly established by 1920.  In effect, the states or governments
appropriated or usurped control of marriages in secular form and in
the process declared Common Law applicable to marriages “abrogated.”

Please pass this information along and share it as widely as possible.
>>

Remember that the ‘Birth Certificate‘ is a document of delivering the produce (baby) to the government warehouse.
You deliver the goods and get a certificate as proof of delivery.  This is what the judges have told people I have talked with.
When you take corn to the grain elevator you get a ‘Certified Grain Receipt’ as proof of entrusting the grain to the elevator.
When you take the birth (baby) to the warehouse (government) as proof of entrusting the goods in their system you get a ‘Birth Certificate’ as documented proof.
Yes the court claim jurisdiction over minors by receiving the evidence of the Birth Certificates, and/or the Marriage License.
To avoid the above and the creation of a SS number (Social Security Identifier Number) just say that due to religious beliefs,you do not name the child until after the character starts to develop.  No name = no number, no certificates, no forms, no registration. This is what my friend did with little problem, but try the same thing with a marriage license and you would most likely be arrested, for not caring for their (STATE) property.

((The STATE as is Satan is a fearful master.))

The chances for happy lives and healthy children are probably greater if a contract with Satan is not consummated.  For the purpose of raising children, a man and a woman should view their marriage as entering into a covenant with God and understand that no state licenses are required in God’s kingdom.  For the purpose
of contract, anyone naive enough to volunteer their relationship into the jurisdiction of the state, in the hopes of realizing some benefit by obtaining a state license, should be allowed to do so at their own peril.  A covenant with God and a license with the state are completely different issues. Break a covenant with God and your soul is sacrificed; break a contract with the state and it takes your worldly possessions and turns your life into a living hell.  Those who seek state licensure for marriage, gay or otherwise, have themselves opted to participate in the demise of the institution of marriage. The state’s interests are best served when licensed marriages dissolve and it’s able to swoop down one people’s wrecked lives and take possession of whatever value remains and assign liability for future collections.  Men and women in love should be married before witnesses in the eyes of God and should never sign a separate contract with the secular state. If those of us who can be married in the eyes of God stopped begging for the state to license our marriage, and we strengthened the sanctity of marriage through our commitments to our spouse and to God, then the state’s licensing of gay marriages can be given the exact amount of attention it deserves: None.
Let those who cannot be married in the eyes of God (Pagans / Those who love evil).
Let us get on with reestablishing our relationships with God, not the state, as our anchor.
—The Idaho ObserverP.O. Box 457Spirit Lake,
Idaho 83869Phone: 208-255-2307Email: observer@coldreams.com

((I Paul John had a dream that people were lined up by the thousands as they sang ‘God Bless America’.
As they sang without looking to ether side of them one in three where being shot in the head.
This dream was symbolic of one in three people conceived in america are aborted.))

>>>>

DIVORCE THE GOVERNMENT: DID YOU BUY A LICENSE TO MARRY IN THE UNITED STATES?
Filed Under GAY MARRIAGE, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, OBAMA, Oath of Office, PRESIDENTS,
ProperTea Tax Tea Party, Territorial Jurisdiction | Leave a Comment
When a couple get a license to marry, they are contributing to the process of being ruled by the military
dictatorship begun by George Washington.  It was Washington who made it possible by his election on February
4, 1789 to the Office of President and his switch in office to President of the United States.  Big government was
initiated by George Washington and will end when couples come together as a Tea Party for two.

On April 30, 1789 took an oath of employment allegiance to the Congress of the United States, as 43 other
sneaky men have done after him.  As the people are finding out with Barack Hussein Obama, Presidents of the
United States are faithless to the people.

Whether or not George Washington was faithful to Martha is not the issue.  Washington was just one of the first of many faithless men who have let the American people down by pretending to be something that they are not.

Law is all about relationships.  An otherwise auspicious one like marriage is easily ruined when an evil third party like government is made part of the relationship.  When the marriage relationship ends and divorce appears, the last thing an unhappy couple needs is the long arm of military law in the form of a Black Robe
“family law judge.”

Common law marriage licenses aren’t for sale because they don’t exist.  The popular myth peddled by the government and its licensed media is that the English common law has been replaced by State Codes and the United States Code.  Young people today are marrying and rearing children under both the common law and
written law.   All they need is a nudge in the direction of the truth and they will quit the written law.

Divorce for couples who are married under the English common law, whether or not recognized by the State, cannot be an issue for the Black Robes.  No paper marriage license means no marriage in the United States.
Under the guise of caring for minor children, the Black Robes claim jurisdiction over children not within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

The State is just the business the oligarchy operates to manage its assets and yours, if you allow it.  Learn to take your business elsewhere by contacting me at edrivera@edrivera.com

Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A friend of mine named Ed Shell, who graduated from law school and refused to get a Bar Card helped in the following:   You may have heard of the group of home schooled children in Texas, I believe they had a Mormon community.  One day the government shows up, prompted by a weak complaint of child abuse.  Several hundred children were taken away from their family by the State over this one complaint.  Several weeks, possibly months went by and no resolve.  One of the people in Texas was told about Ed’s ability to see true jurisdiction so he gave Ed a call.  Ed told him to get a list of all the kids, by each name, write if the child was born of parents with a State Marriage License, and also if there was a Birth Certificate for that same child.  They did as instructed, delivering the same to the District Judge, the Judge looked at the document and immediately issued an order to release all children that had no connection to a State Marriage license or no Birth Certificate which I believe was most all of them, only a few were held back because there was some light evidence of abuse and was justified in my eyes for the State to do so.

>>