Skip to main content

I need a copy of Public law: Chap. 48, 48 Stat. 112.

Englewood, CO |

It contains the very same wording as "HJR-192", however one is a resolution and one is a Public Law. Thanks!!

Attorney Answers 4

Posted

Go on the internet and search for 48 Stat 112, One of the hits should take you to the statute.

Mark as helpful

1 found this helpful

Posted

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=48+Stat.+112

Why this is in IP -- I have no idea.

Mark as helpful

1 found this helpful

Posted

If you cannot find it in the INTERNET, then most cities have public libraries and legal libraries and their reference librarian can help you better than this forum.

Mark as helpful

1 lawyer agrees

Posted

Searching for this will just bring up lots of debate on whether individuals have to repay their debts. Do be warned that reference to this law is often made by fraudulent debt-relief consultants and assorted nuts who will try to convince you that you do not have to pay your debts. Also, note that many old laws meant to deal with the economic situations of the 1930s have been amended or repealed. Moreover, courts can give meaning to laws that may not be readily apparent by simply reading the law itself.

The people at constitution.org have scanned in the 1933/1934 Statutes at Large in an 108 megabyte PDF file. I suggest downloading it and then viewing it, rather than trying to view it in your browser due to its size: http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/sal/048_statutes_at_large.pdf

The particular section you want is on pages 112-113 (the pages in question are listed in the upper RIGHT of the scanned document). The theory is that the resolution was repealed but not the statute so people do not have to repay their debts. I can assure you that reliance on this theory will _not_ work in court.

Mark as helpful

2 found this helpful

6 comments

Asker

Posted

How can whether or not a resolution was repealed and not the statute be a 'theory'?

Asker

Posted

HJR 192 and chapter 48, 48 stat. 112 may say the same thing but they are different. 48 stat. 112 is law...it says we can discharge our debt and it has not been repealed. it's my understanding that a law can't be repealed unless it offers a remedy, which hasn't happened in this case. so my question would be: is there an attorney out there not scared of his/her own shadow that can reveal the truth to us please?

Asker

Posted

You don't need an attorney to prove HJR-192 or 48 statue 112 or pl 73-10. Tell your boss you want your pay in gold bullion from here on out and pay for your groceries with silver. >

Asker

Posted

lol, that's funny, i don't think my employer would do that...a copy of chap. 48, 48 stat. 112 would just aid in proving we could discharge our debt.

Asker

Posted

Furthermore, Keith Richard Frederick makes several presumptions without providing any evidence to support his presumptions. What evidence does he present that just because a fraudulent debt-relief consultant references any law, invalidates or determines if a law has been repealed? Factually, what is 'paying' a debt? And what facts does he base his assurance that reliance on this theory will not work in court? Has he tried? Does he have any first-hand knowledge to support his claims? Just asking... >> > >

Asker

Posted

how can using public law not work in court? if a court doesn't allow a law pertaining to the case then wouldn't it be considered fraud upon the court?