Federal Reserve Note IS v. IS NOT:
Ballentines Law Dictionary, 3rd Edition: Dollar. The legal currency of the United States; State v Downs, 148 Ind 324, 327; the unit of money consisting of one hundred cents. The aggregate of specific coins which add up to one dollar. 36 Am J1st Money § 8. In the absence of qualifying words, it cannot mean promissory notes, bonds, or other evidence of debt. 36 AM J 1st Money § 8. “Taxes, lawfully assessed are collectible by agents in money and notes cannot be accepted in payment.” Town of Frankfort v. Waldo, 128 ME. 1]
HAGAR v. RECLAMATION DIST. NO. 108, 111 U.S. 701 1884).
“Acts of Congress making the notes (paper) of the United States a legal tender do not apply to EXACTIONs (taxes) made under state law”
“At common law there was no tax lien.” [Cassidy v. Aroostock, 134 ME. 34]
U.S. Supreme Court, Memphis Bank & Trust Co. v. Garner, 459 U.S. 392 (1983) “The Tennessee bank tax violates the immunity of obligations (federal reserve notes 31USC3124 & 18USC8) of the United States from state and local taxation.”
“Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars.” Russell L. Munk, Assistant General Counsel, Department of the Treasury, February 18, 1977. “The term ‘dollars’ likewise is incorrect, which, according to constitutional definition, are monetary units, used in exchange, backed by gold and silver. Our present-day fiat issues are supported by more printed paper of the same; therefore, they are correctly termed Federal Reserve Notes (FRN), not dollars. Robert P. Vichas, Handbook of Financial Mathematics, Formulas, and Tables (1979), p. 420.
“Federal Reserve Bank notes, and other notes constituting a part of common currency of the country, are recognized as good tender for money, unless specially objected to.” MacLeod v. Hoover (1925), 159 La. 244, 105 S. 305.
Gibbons v Ogden 1824 supreme court “Persons are not the subjects of commerce…”
“There is a distinction between a debt discharged and one paid. When discharged, the debt still exists, though divested of its character as a legal obligation during the operation of the discharge.” Stanek v. White (1927), 172 Minn. 390, 215 N.W. 781.
