Romley Stewart has suffered a lot to make this information available to anyone who takes the time to read it.

Wonderful work, please read.

RomleyJustinianDeceptiondoglatin12817

Recent videos

 

#Rohan
Justinian Publishing
presents

A Guide to Modern Slavery

This literature is a comprehensive guide to enslavement and slave trading for the scum of the earth to bypass anti-slavery laws that exist in every jurisdiction. Slavery is the highest yield investment possible. Regardless of if you are Royalty, the President or an oligarch or the Pope, this manual is for you. By abusing the law, equity, and grammar you can be rich beyond your wildest dreams. There are many scholarly articles on the personalization of corporations. This treatise is on the very secret and converse process of the incorporation of people.
1. The Golden Rule
If you are considering a career in slavery, make sure you have made allowances for any one or more of your slaves to be manumitted with due compensation, if you don’t do this and the slave works out he or she is a slave then you will face rebellion. Given enough time unchecked, this will lead to the loss of all slaves and dire consequences for you as a slave holder. This is the golden rule of corporate chattel slavery. Disregard this rule at your own peril.
2. The Franchise
The first lesson in slavery is to franchise the operation. Once perfected as a private corporate jurisdiction in one location by enslaving one group of people, simple transfer and duplicate this system elsewhere to enslave another group of people. You might like to call this “McSlavery.” This will give you a better control of the system when you need to modify it for better profits, however if you have not followed the golden rule in at chapter 1, you risk losing complete control of all the slavery corporations, and not just yours, all of them. Once a slave in one corporation works out the process used to enslave, he or she will be well versed to uncover and disclose the modus operandi in the replicated corporation, and they will write and publish a manual such as this one.
We are in the time of social media and this technology allows information to be shared instantaneously and spread at an alarming rate. The slaves know this and will utilise the fact to come together in a massive uprising and you will be the target as a slave corporation owner.
3. Incorporate
The rules of equity allow you to deceive most ordinary people into slavery. The use of the doctrine of incorporations is vital to this process. Incorporations allows the use of a legal fiction to literally own people. Most slaves will never work out what a corporation is let alone, they are volunteering to be the holder of the office of one. A corporation is a stand alone private jurisdiction only governed by the terms of its articles of incorporation. If you can trick your victims into joining your corporation, you will make untold profits. The best way to do this is to pass your private slavery corporation off as a government. To
do this use a majuscule letter form identifiers to make letterforms/wordmarks to avoid any liability for slavery. An example of this would be the use of “AUSTRALIA” for your corporation as opposed to the name of “Australia.”
One of the features of an incorporation is that it has been decided by the courts as being “property in trust” for the corporators. The slaves, or as you will call them, “volunteers.” are your property for this exercise. All you need to do is deceive your victims into holding your identity documents that feature your artwork that they mistake for their name, and they are considered volunteers because they never asked to be paid. All you have to do then, is abuse the maxim of equity that “the law will not aid a volunteer” and presto, all human rights are extinguished. There is no such thing as corporate rights.
4. Imperia in Imperio
Incorporate within a corporation. Whereas a Nation has a sovereign in a government or monarch, you cannot just claim such titles despite your pathological addiction to unjust authority to do so. By creating corporations within corporation within corporations you can obtain such power and further your criminal empire and unjust enrichment. Whatever you do, do not call the corporations “Corporations”, Instead have a nomenclature of the documents of incorporation called such things as a Constitution, driver’s license, medicare card, birth certificates, credit card, phone bill and so on.
The prime directive is to deceive your victims into thinking that the name and identity on these documents is their own identity even though there is no way in law this could ever be possible because you will write the “Laws” of “Slavery Incorporated” to prevent this from even being possible. You can even make laws that actually criminalise the use of your identity and your victims will be none the wiser while you double their liability to you in a criminal manner by holding your identity.
An example of this in the slavery corporation identified as Crown in Right of New South Wales is Section 192J of the Crimes Act 1900. Your victims will actually break your law of not using someone else’s identity as they think the corporate letterform identifier you created is actually their name, it not, it is actually your artwork, and you retain moral rights by a well written copyright act. As they hold your artwork as provided on all the documents ab initio from the Birth Certificate the presumption of law is “they want to be your volunteer and pay all your debts” that you decide to assign to your “Persons” identified by your artwork.
To summerise this section, at all costs avoid a man in a state in democratic nation who holds allodial title, instead you want a man volunteering to hold your corporate identifier for a corporation in a corporation in a corporation.
5. The names
You want to avoid ever being liable for your crimes. A great way to do this is to produce documents that resemble a language with subtle changes to render the document unworkable. You would never admit this until your head was on the guillotine of course, as if it became public you would lose your slaves and the associated profit.
The most common way to do this is by glossing. Firstly, print a style manual, let’s say for the English language, this sets the standard you must use for the style to be considered English as a formal language.
Define a proper noun for example, as one capital letter with the rest in lower case. Use technical terms for this, let’s say a majuscule letter followed by miniscule letters for each name element.
Now whatever you do, do not follow the rules of the style for the formal language in the style manual. The easiest and most effective use of this is to put one or more of the name elements used in the bi-nominal system in full capital letters, that is in all majuscule text. Now you have a private cipher created by you and only you have the moral rights to assign meaning to your artwork via the copyright act once again. Warning: do note let the police or any department of prosecution use a proper noun as a name, you will be liable for the correct use of the English language. Indoctrinate children in the education system to accept majuscule letterform artworks as word comprised of letters. Rule the world with the shift key on your computer.
An example of this would be the name; Jason Barry Frith. Now this style is correct in English. Never use this style as you would be liable for slavery, use Jason Barry FRITH to corrupt the name or for a more pronounced effect use JASON BARRY SMITH, after all you own these artworks, you are free to assign them any meaning you want. The meaning you ascribe will be that of the corporation created by your birth certificate. More in Birth Certificates.
Now define the full capital letters style as something else. Once again you can use your style manual to do this as you can then say, “hey, I never said that was English,” and you have credible deniability. The majuscule style looks so much like English the untrained eye will simply accept it as genuine. This process is known as a “Joker.” A great definition of a majuscule style is a corporate letterform identifier.
The corporate letter form identifier is an artwork identifying a corporate entity (a Trademark). Then you will simply give yourself moral rights as the artist in your corporate structure that you will refer to as law despite it not being anything authoritative about it at all.
A great example of this can be found in the Australian “Governments” Style Manual, Sixth Edition, Wiley Publishing 2012. Page 121 defines a proper name as a proper noun with the style of one capital letter. This excludes the possibility of any other style, such as the majuscule letters being able to every be interpreted as a name. Now you a not liable for anyone who uses it as a name.
So now we have defined a name, and what is not a name, lets define what the majuscule letter forms actually are, this allows you to double down on avoiding liability. Remember we want your victims liable and you, not liable. Refer to page 291 of the Style Manual where it covertly defines majuscule letterforms as corporate identifiers. Good idea to keep definitions subtle.
To summarise, give your victims a number of artworks that you own and trick your victims into thinking it is their name. This is the best way to abuse the maxim “Identity comes from a number of sources.”
Don’t forget to praise lucifer for this method, after you can’t have a cifer(Cipher) without Lucifer. Brought to you by the Catholic Church.
6. Redefine what a “person” means
As your corporation is a private jurisdiction that you own and all the property owned by the corporation is held in trust for you, you need to define words to suit what you want them to mean. Dictionaries are what your victim will think the word means but it won’t mean that in your corporate jurisdiction. Let’s look at the noun “person.” A dictionary will tell you a person is a human, a man or woman or child
without reference to sex, an individual. You must let them continue to believe this is what a “person” means. Do not under any circumstances let anyone actually work out what a person really is defined as by your definition.
The first step is to make the definition ambiguous. The definition of all the entries of the word “person” must, I repeat must include, but not be limited to the word “Corporation.” There are some such definitions. This author refers to this as the “Simple definition protocol.”
Some examples of the simple definition protocol approach can be found in the following legislation:
1. Section 41(1), Acts Interpretations Act 1931, Tasmania.
“In any Act the expressions person and party respectively shall include any body of persons, corporate or unincorporate, other than the Crown.”
2. Schedule 1, Interpretations Act 1978, United Kingdom
“Person” includes a body of persons corporate or unincorporate. [1889] 3. Section 4, Crimes Act 1900 NSW.
“Person”, “Master”, and “Employer” severally include any society, company, or corporation.
The above definition only requires the addition of the maxim of interpretation “inclusio est exclusio alterius” which is “what is included excludes all else” to be defeated. Note, all definitions have the word “include” to empower this maxim. This excludes the possibility of “including” any reference to a man, woman, child or even a natural person.
The second type of definition of “person” is the “either” definition. These definitions define a “person” as an individual or corporation. Obviously, you would not ever use the definition of individual as you would be liable but put it in there to deceive people into thinking you are using this definition.
The “incorporating” definition of “person” is a more sophisticated use of the English language. This is done by omitting the particle “or” and replacing it with an adjective conjunction such as “as well as” or “and.” The actual meaning of this phrase incorporates the victim.
Where an untrained eye would see the definition as being one of two of three options, this is not actually the case. The conjunctive joins the individual to the corporation. an example of this would be:
1. Section 21 of the Interpretations Act 1987 (NSW)
“person” includes an individual, a corporation and a body corporate or politic.
Because of the use of the conjunctive “and” this definition reads “person” includes and individual as a corporation as a body corporate (the corporation and individual together) or a politic. It is worth noting that a politic is not a body politic. A politic (noun) is a politician whereas a body politic is the de jure people making up the society. Obviously, we cannot allow them to use a body politic so use the term “politic” to confuse your victims.
If the definition was to be written correctly it would read:
“Person” includes an individual “or” a corporation or a body corporate or a politic.
By swapping out “or” and replacing it with “and” you have just incorporated the individual.
Another example of the “incorporating” definition is found in:
2. Section 2C of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cwth).
(1) In any Act, expressions used to denote persons generally (such as “person”, “party”, “someone”, “anyone”, “no-one”, “one”, “another” and “whoever”), include a body politic or corporate as well as an individual.
The part of the phrase is “corporate as well as an individual.” Because “or” is swapped out for “as well as” which means “in addition to,” the definition means a corporate as well as an individual, in other words a corporation with an individual connected to it.
Doing this prevents you suffering any liability as you never reference a man, woman or child. You have plausible deniability. When your hired goons (police) arrest someone who is not holding the office of the corporate-person and commit the crime of slavery by forced incorporation you can avoid liability by saying that you never told the police that they could arrest a non-corporate man, woman or child. Just claim the police acted “personally” when they committed the crime.
If the jurist your goons arrested and kidnapped are aware of the maxims relating to the fact a master is liable for the actions of his servants. This principle named command responsibility is affirmed in the Yamshita Standard, the Medina Standard or superior responsibility. These resulted in execution of Nazi and Japanese superior officers so make sure none of your victims are aware of these doctrines as your plausible deniability will most likely not withstand a challenge in a Court of competent jurisdiction.
(Command responsibility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_responsibility)
You will be safe by converting the courts of the du jure government of the people to private Unidroit tribunals that you control, and the doctrine of cronyism will keep you safe. Make sure you enable your courts by provision in the law to summarily dismiss a matter without a reason being given to allow the cronyism by outlawry in your favour. Choose only state (corporate) friendly staff to maximise this effect. Your safety relies upon the stockholm syndrome suffered by certain slaves wherein it is so severe they will pervert the course of justice to make sure the crimes of the corporation never see a jury. (Rohan Lorian v. Crown in Right of New South Wales HCA 52/2023.)
(Unidroit https://www.unidroit.org/)
Some examples of this are Rule 6.07.1 and 13.03.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (C’wth). These Rules are used by the corporate “HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA” to override Section 80 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (U.K.) that every matter shall be heard by a Jury. Of course, the High Court of Australia does not exist in your corporation as it is now the identity using the artwork “HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA” so it is no longer a constitutional court pursuant to Section 71 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia Act 1900 (U.K.), but is a Unidroit tribunal only hearing and making decisions for, private corporate matters.
Section 80 of the Constitution is being overridden by the operation of 122 of the constitution by changing all the laws of the Commonwealth to be laws of the territory.
High Court Rules 2004 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2019C00003 )
Australian Constitution Section 80 (https://www.ausconstitution.org/home/chapter-3-the-judicature/section-80)
“HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA ABN (http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s71.html) Note the real “High Court of Australia” would be a Constitutional entity and would not be registered to the “COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” is it is a superior entity.
Section 71 Australian Constitution (http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s71.html)
Also add in other definition such as society and company, natural person and individual. This is to give the impression you are not actually incorporating people for the purposes of slavery even though you are. The best process is to add to the definition “individual” and “Natural Person.” By adding in these terms as it gives the impression the laws apply to these entities despite that fact you are not using the entities at all. If you tried to use this scheme on an individual/natural person you would be liable for slavery and prison would follow shortly thereafter. Only apply this to office holders of your corporate persons. No I.D, no authority, don’t risk it. A sovereign will never hold your identity. Mess with a sovereign, lose the battle.
7. Use the inclusio unius exclusio alterius maxim of interpretation/
The second step in this process is to abuse the maxim “inclusio unius est exclusio alterius” which means what is included excludes all else. This can also be written as “expressio unius est exclusio alterius.” This is the most important maxim you will ever come across. This maxim is a common maxim of interpretation of legislation, constitutions, contracts and so on used by the courts regularly in cases.

For your clarification: “What is included, excludes all else.”

Once again, this legal use of the word “includes” will not arouse suspicion among your victims as common use of this word does not conjure up the “excludes” all else” doctrine. But this is the technically correct definition and technically correct is the best kind of correct. So, the definition of a person written for example in Section 4 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Definitions says verbatim
“Person, Master, and Employer severally include any society, company, or corporation.”
So, when applying this maxim of interpretation to this definition a “person” can only be a society or company or corporation.
This excludes any possibility of you being convicted for slavery as the unwitting victim who did not read this definition with reference to the maxim of interpretation has agreed by lack of objection, that he or she is a society, company or corporation, and you and I know it’s the definition of corporation we have applied via the Births Deaths and Marriages registration Act 1995 and the Form of Information filled out at a coincidental time as the biological birth that creates the corporation.
The victim as a defendant is not a defendant in a de jure court of law but as the surety for our corporation-person in our de facto tribunal. This is an excellent example of the abuse of the maxims, “He who enters the court corrects the false name,” and “an error left unchallenged in a court of law is left to stand.” You can even get cocky and have your appointed private trier of fact in you privately controlled court ask the victim “Are you Mr FRITH?” This will actually give you consent to the slavery, as the victim just volunteered to be the surety. The combination of these doctrines is so powerful you don’t even have to give due process that a corporation might have in law as its your corporation-person, you can do what you like, have your trier of fact simply charge the preapproved amount for the dereliction of the terms of the volunteer trustee. They can’t say they were not aware due to the maxim and legislation that no defense can be obtained from ignorance of the law. “Ignrantis juris excusat neminem.”
If you wish to visualise this in a court of law the magistrate is talking to the corporation created by the birth certificate i.e., a piece of paper. Whomever was stupid enough to talk back on behalf of the corporation is now the liable party. The test in law for an idiot is that they make a mistake in their own name. As you will see the birth certificate rarely has a name on it and if it does it belongs to the Crown as Crown copyright. engineer this into your copyright act such as in the Copyright Act 1968 (Cwth):
“176 Crown copyright in original works made under direction of Crown
(1) Where, apart from this section, copyright would not subsist in an original literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work made by, or under the direction or control of, the Commonwealth or a State, copyright subsists in the work by virtue of this subsection.”
Because the Births Deaths and Marriages Registrar creates the birth certificate and signs it, the copyright is the Crown identity. You can actually get your victim to pay for the Birth Certificate that enslaves them by abusing trust law. Don’t let them work out that the registration document is the key to the estate by using the first name only and the” date of registration” as a date of birth. It is the trick of putting two separate corporate entities on the registration document you offer remedy, if the victims ever work out that the first (christian) name/identity is a different corporate person from the surname/date of birth identity. The copyright and therefore the moral right of the registration document are the right of the parent and not the crown as the parents sign this document.
The christian name/date of registration identity is remedy as this identifies the benefactor. The surname/date of birth identity identifies the beneficiary/trustee, most people will combine the two artworks being the christian “name” and the “surname” and use the wrong date of birth being the day they were born thinking it is a binomial name doctrine whereas it is two separate corporate-person identities. This is why the King, or the Pope only use one name. To go back to being the man who is the corporator as only a man/woman can create a corporation, not the other way around. “A man can only have one name in law.”
9. Complexity
At this junction I would like to introduce you to the complexity in your corporate legislative framework. To achieve this, hide things in non-logical places. For example, when you define an Australian Nation as a natural person or corporation, don’t put it in the Citizenship Act, put in the Sea Installations Act 1987 Section 4 Interpretations. Much less likely a jurist will find it and use it against you.
Don’t be stupid like the New South Wales slave corporation corporator was, and exclude the definition of natural person and individual, as now all a slave has to do is ask the court “what definition of person are you using? “and “which entity out of a society, company or corporation am I? and “how did I become whichever entity the court is limited to?” The slave will destroy your system with these questions.
Make the term ambiguous so a person could be a natural person or a corporation, an Australian national could be a citizen or a corporation. Obviously, we want to cement the definition of person to a corporation but do that with grammar (see 5. names) and the Birth certificate (see Birth Certificate,) make sure all people are citizens to ensure there are no indigenous Nationals left in the area your slavery corporation administrates the corporation-persons. If only one comes back you are screwed, see section 1. especially if your tribunals, called courts, are asked to define what a “person” is for the matter before it. If the tribunal defines it as a corporation, you as corporator, are liable for slavery directly by forced incorporation. If you define it as a natural person/individual, you are liable for slavery via the definitions in other acts, different mechanism of law, same outcome.
Remember your safety from prosecution and your profits rely upon your victims’ making presumptions, having no idea of the actual meanings in your corporate jurisdiction, and the difficulty in locating such definitions in the corporate legislation. For example, the corporator of the slavery corporation identified by the artwork “AUSTRALIA” defines floating as “Under waters.” (Section 4, Sea Installations Act 1987 (Cwth)). No victim would ever think this is the definition of floating, but this is your private artwork or cipher and you can ascribe any meaning you want, If floating means “under water” in your corporation then that’s what it means in your courts.
10. Put it somewhere else
Whilst on the topic of abusing the maxims of interpretation, let’s abuse the exclusio unius exclusio alterius maxim again. Let’s say you had no right to take land under your international obligations. The legal methods for taking land are accretion, conquest, effective occupation, prescription, and annexure. Let’s use the example of the landmass lying between the coordinates of 9 degrees South to 45 Degrees South of the equator and 113 Degrees East to 154 Degrees East of the meridian of longitude running through Greenwich, London, United Kingdom.
Most of your victims would say this is the Nation of Australia. The fact is it is neither a Nation nor Australia. But for heaven’s sake don’t let them find out this fact. “AUSTRALIA” is actually a foreign administration corporation available for foreign investment for private gain and in a geographical sense it comprises the Island and all the other islands and rocks lying within the area bounded by the parallels 28 degrees 59 minutes and 29 degrees 9 minutes south latitude and the meridians 167 degrees 54 minutes and 168 degrees east longitude. Australia is, in a geographical sense, Norfolk Island. (See Schedule 1-The Territory of Norfolk Island, Norfolk Island Act 1979 (cwth)).
To avoid slavery charges by the registering authority that gives you the authority to incorporate, i.e., your sovereign, in this case he United States of America via the Securities and Exchange Commission which registers the corporation with the Artwork “COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” Central Index key number 805157. This jurisdiction unfortunately has the 13th Amendment of the Constitution, and we don’t want to be liable under that. There may be a defense as the Government of the United States is in Washington D.C. which is not a state and therefore not part of the United States of America and therefore the Constitution does not apply.
So how do you as the corporator of “Slavery” Inc. get administrative control of the landmass that is not actually “Australia?” Do this:
1. Approach the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom based “Commonwealth of Australia” Corporation that is constituted by the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900.
2. When the prime minister refuses to sign the documents for private incorporation have the CIA via a U.S. Navy submarine abduct him to be disposed of. Then name a swimming pool the “Harold Holt Memorial Swimming Centre.”
3. Find a corruptible prime minister, preferably a corrupt lawyer named Gogh Whitlam Explain to him that “Australia” was never a sovereign nation but a colony, and once people were born here they are no longer colonist as required by the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia.
4. Pay him to register the “AUSTRALIA” as a corporation on the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.
5. Implement your “Artwork” bearing Birth Certificates.
6. Define Australia in a geographical sense by once again utilising the maxim inclusio unius est exclusio alterius by saying:
Australia means the Commonwealth of Australia and, when used in a geographical sense, includes Norfolk Island, the Territory of Christmas Island and the Territory of Cocos (Keeling) Islands, but does not include any other external Territory.
änd
Commonwealth means the Commonwealth of Australia and, when used in a geographical sense, includes Norfolk Island, the Territory of Christmas Island and the Territory of Cocos (Keeling) Islands, but does not include any other external Territory.
Notes: 1. Section 2B Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cwth) Definitions 6 and 16.
2. In this Act Norfolk Island is not referred to as a territory as it is not a territory of Australia. The only territories of Norfolk Island (AUSTRALIA) are the territories mentioned being the Coco’s (Keeling) Islands and Christmas Island.
By the operation of the maxims of interpretation being “inclusio unius est exclusio alteirius” and “ejusdem generis,” Australia is, and can only be Norfolk Island with the external territories of Coco’s (Keeling) Islands and Christmas Island. Add the section “excludes all external territories” to make sure you make no reference to the landmass you are actually deceiving your victims into thinking it is Australia. Your victims will presume that Australia must be here, and the states are here and the territories are here internally. This is completely wrong as the internal territories are corporate subdivision located on Norfolk Island and the states are part of Australia pursuant to the Preamble and section 109 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 U.K., so it is nugatory where the states define themselves to be as 2B of the Acts Interpretations Act 1901 supersedes any state law by the function of Section 109 of the Australian Constitution.
Now you have defeated the 13th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and nobody is ever going to believe you managed to move Australia to Norfolk Island in 1973. Where Australia was located before 1973 is an unknown quality.
One problem remains, how do you give yourself administrative power in a foreign jurisdiction. Well, most of your victims will readily admit to being the surety of your corporation by holding your birth certificate and subsequent identification thinking it’s their name. They will think they are an Australian National because they don’t know you added the definition of “Corporation” to the definition of ‘Australian National,’ they will think they are Australia citizens. by Birth or naturalisation as they think this is Australia when it’s actually Norfolk Island. So, they volunteer to your jurisdiction of Norfolk Island. All these falsities will act in your favor.
By using trust law, you can get extraterritorial long-arm jurisdiction as all trusts are contracts. The maxim is “contracts and debts have no location.” As you are making the victims trustees of their own estates that they are the benefactors by giving them the wrong identity. The fines, taxes, profits of industry are actually being paid into the estate for the benefactor by the benefactor that was fraudulently converted to a trustee of his/her own estate. Reference this in the definition of “Land.” For example:
“Acts Interpretations Act 1901 (Cwth)
land includes messuages, tenements and hereditaments, corporeal and incorporeal, of any tenure or description, whatever may be the estate or interest in them.”
Don’t use any dictionary definition of “Land” which means “The surface of the earth.” Probably a good idea not to let the “slave trustee volunteer” know that the “estate or interest in them” means that the victim actually owns the land as benefactor of allodial title by right of birth on the “Land” (Dictionary definition).
11. Use Fraud.
Because the documents you have created are not English, but being passed off as English you are committing fraud. A savvy slave would confirm with your intermediary corporations such as a Tribunal (Court), would get them to confirm the language in use is English, then charge the trier with fraudulent documents using a style manual as an authority for proving fraud. Until this happens your illiterate slave will accept you artworks as English proper nouns as proper names, and in doing so, presents and hold the false documents themselves.
This is a great use of the maxim fraud merits fraud and avoids the clean hands doctrine of equity because the slave is holding your identity documents and cannot possibly have clean hands and therefore cannot have any rights enforceable in equity. The slave cannot prosecute you whilst holding and/or receiving any benefit from the fraud as they themselves are co-conspirators. A sovereign will not hold, interact with, accept delivery of or in any other way transact with you and your slavery corporation.
You need to hear matters extraterritorially. You can’t prosecute the office holders of your corporation-persons on Norfolk Island, that would be too obvious to extradite for a parking ticket to hear the matter on Norfolk Island. Give your corporation long arm jurisdiction by something like Section 60(c) of the Norfolk Island Act which says Norfolk Island matters may be heard in a host jurisdiction. The host
jurisdiction is the area and people you have conned into slavery. You can now freely profit from the labors of the people and their mineral and energy wealth.
You have solved the problem of crimes of genocide of the indigenous population and other crimes by making no claim to their land, your just contracted them out of their allodial title and the fruits of their labors. You have only made a claim of terra nullius on lands you got lawfully pursuant to the doctrine of effective occupation. As long as nobody ever works out where “AUSTRALIA” is and who owns it you can keep administration under the doctrine of prescription for as long as you want.
Caution must be used if a slave claims to an oversite body such as the United Nations that you are arbitrarily depriving them of Nationality by private incorporation pursuant to Article 15 of the Declaration of human rights, obviously you don’t want to lose your rights yourself so the information contained herein will prevent you being prosecuted for crimes against humanity whilst profiting as a perpetrator of the exact same crimes with complete immunity. Such is the power of abusing the principle of equity.
Ensure you engineer extraterritorial jurisdiction into all your criminal offences acts. Examples can be found in 10(c) of the Crimes act 1900 (NSW) or Section 14.1 of the Criminal Code act 1995 (Cwth).
Make sure you give jurisdiction to vessels in the criminal code Act 1995, to define a vessel as a structure that floats, say in section 4 of the Sea Installations Act, then define floating as “under waters” and this sufficiently describes any courthouse structure as a vessel that would sink and is a ship to achieve the ends of long arm jurisdiction in maritime law. But don’t limit yourself to one jurisdiction. If you change the jurisdiction mid-proceedings by having your trier leave the “ship”(courtroom) in one jurisdiction and return in another jurisdiction, the victim will have no idea what jurisdiction applies and therefore be unable to understand the charges resulting in a defeasible defense of your debts as applied to him. Unless your victim goes back to requesting full disclosure of the origin of jurisdiction each time the case is restarted, your slavery will be effective.
12. Birth Certificates
This is the start of the slavery evidence chain. Firstly, make sure you control the government’s legislation drafters, recruiting these people will make your life easy. Don’t worry about the parliamentarians, they, like most others, will sign whatever is put in front of them. Most towing the party line don’t give a shit about their fellow man and will happily sell them down the river for a slightly above average paycheck. The nature of man is brutal, even the most cultured man is little more than a rabid dog. The mechanism varies from an overtly violent man to a narcissistic non-human such as you as a corporator. The technique varies but the desired outcome of coercive control by authority remains the same. At least a violent man fights his own battles, as the corporator you will employ goons (police) to enforce your will upon others.
The writing of the Births Deaths and Marriages Acts will be of supreme importance, this is where we create the corporate entity and avoid liability. Let’s look at the example of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995 (NSW). As always, we want to redefine the words so nobody will comprehend what has happened yet retain the legislative ability to enforce our will by incorporation.
By using our old friend, the maxim inclusio unius exclusio alterius, redefine a birth to mean only a dead baby. This is done with the definition saying, “Child includes a still-birth” (Section 4). Then make it so
only a dead baby can be born by defining “Birth includes a still-Birth.” (Section 4). Then say something like (Section 12(2)) The notice must be given–
(a) in the case of a child born alive–within 7 days after birth, or
So, a child (which by definition is a still-birth) born alive must registered as dead within seven days.
Obviously, the child is not dead but, in your corporation, by your definitions, the child is considered dead. This is great use of the term “Civil death” where a man or woman is considered dead for all legal purposes. This is a form of outlawry that will prevent you slave from ever prosecuting you.
Now let’s incorporate the alodial title of the child. As a birth right, God has granted the bounty of the earth to each man and woman equally, this is embodied in Article 1 of the United Nations declaration of human right. As discussed, the easiest way to circumvent human rights is to incorporate the man or woman. If we have an equal share, how do we get our slave to work for us and we can’t sell him his own share of his property. Incorporation solves this. As the office holder is the surety and has agreed to pay the debts for your corporation-person whatever he buys, you own, after all its your corporation, you own the equity.
So, if your slave “buys” a house he can never own it. You own it. You let him live in it, but you charge him, to do this via rates, mortgage fees via your banks etc. You do this by changing allodial title into split title, Legal title, and equitable title. You retain the equitable title in the house, he has legal title only making him financially responsible for the debts created by you by passing corporate legislation to charge him whatever you feel like, any default on payment of violation of your building codes etc. is a perfect opportunity to up the profits by fines and legal actions. If the default is substantial or he commits a crime your government can just take his house, after all its your person that owns it. A very similar system should operate with automobiles. Make him buy it and give it to you via registration. Then license him to use your car, fine him if he doesn’t do upkeep to your standard and take the car off him if he drives it outside your guidelines, why not, after all he volunteered to buy you a car.
The division of ownership into two parts is trust law. You hold the equity, and he holds the debts. As long as he doesn’t work out he doesn’t own the car and is therefore not liable for the debts unless he is paid, you have a free car. As benefactor you can reclaim the estate (the car) if the trustee acts outside the guidelines of the trust. Call the terms and conditions of the trust “Laws” so he thinks he must obey them. Once again, your corporation, so the words mean what you want them to not what he thinks.
Trust law is the ideal species of corporation to enact slavery, like a master slave relationship the benefactor trustee relationship is very similar. The benefactor directs the trustee to use the estate property only for the benefit of the benefactor. There are a couple of really nasty tricks you can do here to ensure the slave acts to your will.
First, never tell him it’s a trust, don’t put it in any legislation that directly states that it’s a trust. Simply rely upon the doctrine of implied trust. He is acting as trustee by accepting legal title of the estate the trust is implied.
Second, if he doesn’t know it’s a trust he won’t ask for payment, he will work and pay for your debts without compensation. If he does ask for payment see section 1.
Thirdly, Do the ol switcheroo. When you incorporate him after defining him as a dead baby place his estate into trust and you be the trustee by employing a registrar of births, deaths and marriages to be trustee for him. His parents will register him as dead for you and then enter his allodial title to the lands into and estate in trust for him by the registration form. To avoid liability this document is the one he needs to access his estate later. Make a comment on this document that it is in the custody of the registrar to give full disclosure that he has an estate. He can only claim the estate with a will and testament from his registering parent and he must know his name, until then, you can presume him dead or missing. In the case of trust law when the benefactor is missing the trustee can access the estate. That’s you and that’s how you get his entitlement to the wealth of the lands.
As your employee your crown copyright is obtained from any document the registrar makes such as the birth certificate. How do you incorporate the “Dead” child. As trustee the registrar must look after the estate until the benefactor returns or seven years, then the trustee can raid the estate. So, to incorporate the man, use a corporate letterform identifier on the Birth Certificate. You don’t even have to do this as his stupid parent most likely put a corporate letter form identifier on his registration document.
To clarify:
The registration document creates an estate in trust for the child, as the child is the benefactor.
The birth certificate makes the benefactor into the co-trustee, where there is more than one trustee the trustee (not the registrar but the registered child) can be beneficiary of the trust also. Use this to maintain him to minimum standards such as medicare and the dole and charge his account for any court or prison time. Let him pay for his own incarceration for being a deficient trustee of his own estate. As long as he doesn’t work out, he is the benefactor or charges you to be trustee/beneficiary you will make money and maintain control over his actions. You will want laws in place to allow him to return to the position of benefactor, if you don’t provide these you are liable. Some good examples of these are found in Section 21 and 38 of the Imperial Acts Interpretation Act 1969 (NSW). You can empower the Cestui que vie Ac 1666 U.K. in your corporation to cover yourself as is the case in NSW.
While he holds your birth certificate you can presume, he wants to be your trustee and pay all the debts of the trust, if he didn’t ask for any money consider him a volunteer with no rights pursuant to the maxims of equity. Now, that’s how you get away with slavery even when there are laws against slavery.
13. Incorporate everything
When you incorporate you must provide every feature of a de jure government. Obviously, it’s not a de jure government but it’s your tyrannical dictatorship. You must have the three branches of government, the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. Make laws that empower the judiciary with powers of the legislature like summary dismissal of matters with trial. In NSW a court registrar can strike out a matter of slavery without due process pursuant to the Criminal Procedures Act 1986. Also allow the
legislature to make executive and judicial decisions, in NSW the attorney General (executive) is a sitting member of the parliament (Legislative) who can decide not to allow any case to be prosecuted (Judicial). Don’t let a little thing like the doctrine of separation of powers exist, as the persons you appoint to these positions, should be chosen on high levels of stockholm syndrome towards your corporate governance.
A full working parliament will give structure to your corporation and the slave will self-manage, make slave payments, (tax) and even regulate other slaves for you. You can tax all the members of parliament, executive and the judiciary so your corporate government will make you money whilst maintaining stability in the corporate. The laws they make only apply to those incorporated. As you are the corporator you have a type of sovereign immunity as you are not corporate into your own corporation.
14. An escape route
Make some very basic laws ensuring your rights as a man. The Imperial Acts Interpretations Act 1969 which empowers (1297) 25 Edward I (Magna Carter) will ensure you will never be trapped by your own laws. Another trick is the effectiveness clause. Make sure all acts say, “This act binds the Crown.” The crown being your crown copyright. No one will realise that none of your laws actually say, they bind any man or woman. While they hold your Crown copyright, they are the Crown, and the acts bind them.
If you are really wanting to deceive them into thinking Australia is an independent sovereign nation, make a “Law” like the Australia Act 1986 that makes this claim, but don’t put in an effectiveness clause, so leave out “This act binds the crown” then it binds nothing. People will think it’s an effective act when it’s not. As long as no one notices this is missing, you are on easy street.

Maxims the slaves could use against you

1. ejusdem generis rule – a rule of construction: general words (as in a statute) that follow specific words in a list must be construed as referring only to the types of things identified by the specific words.
Therefore in 2B of the “Acts Interpretations Act 1901,” definitions 6 and 16, the Islands mentioned are the entire geographic region of Australia as the definition cannot be extended to other locations such as our lands or China or anywhere else. The specific words are the Islands, and the general words are “excludes all other external territories.”
2. inclusio unius est exclusion alterius – what is included excludes all else. Also written expression unius est exclusio alterius.
In 2B of the “Acts Interpretation Act 1901” the inclusion of the Islands in definition 6 and 16, and the exclusion of any reference to any other territory means that any, and all other territories are excluded. This applies in any definition of where the word “Includes” is used.
3. ab abusu ad usum non valet consequentia – A conclusion about the use of a thing from its abuse is invalid
Use this maxim to vitae documents with the government or courts as they are abusing the languages on the document (thing) to enslave the victims. They will avoid actually referencing the documents as fraud and just railroad the victim, but this maxim remains correct.
4. absoluta sententia expositore non indiget – A simple propsition nees no expositor.
This means a proper noun has one capital letter and the rest in lower case does not need to be explained, this is the academic level of a 5 year old yet nobody works out the full capitals is not a proper noun.
5. Accessorium non ducit sed seqitur suun principale – The accessory follows the nature of the principle
The corporate person created by the birth certificate is an accessory to the corporation registered on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The successful challenge to the validity of the U.S. corporation as a de jure government would void the corporate person.
6. A communi observantia non est recedendum – There should be no departure from common observance. (or usage).
The styles manual should not be departed from in relation to the English language. You are not using English although you are saying you do. A slave could use this maxim to force you to accept that a name is a common noun, full capital letters, is a letterform wordmark. This could also be used to ensure other maxims, legislation and authorities are upheld such as maxims 1 and 2.
7. Acta exteriora indicant interiora – Outward acts indicate the thoughts hidden with.
When your goons and lackies refuse to answer questions relating to material in this treatise presented as slavery allegations this maxim can be proved “mens rea.” (guilty mind). Although slavery is an absolute liability and does not need “mens rea.” (6.2 Criminal Code Act 1995 Cwth.) This also prevents a defense on mistake of fact.
8. Actio non datur non damnificato – an action is not given to one who is not injured
This proves you are acting to force the victim into a forced contract, being a contract to be an unpaid trustee (contracts are void without consideration/payment). Who is injured by a slave speeding? The answer is you are, by breach of contract. As the injured party by non-observance of the contract, by speeding. The jurist could assert you can only be injured if there is a contract in place, which is true, and you have not disclosed the contract nor paid for the services provided by the slave in the contract, ergo slavery.
9. Actus judiciarius coram nin judice irritus habetur de ministeriali autem a quocunque provenit ratum esto – A judicial act before one not a judge (or without jurisdiction) is void.
As “AUSTRALIA” is a foreign corporation using the principle of Unidroit private law to act as the de jure government when it is not, the jurist could assert that the origin of the jurisdiction, the magistrate/judge is sitting under is not valid therefore, the acts of the magistrate are nugatory as the jurisdiction is not constitutional nor domestic.
10. Actus legis nemini facit injuram – an act of law prejudices no one.
This could be used against you to remove you from the territory you are administering unlawfully as your own laws, such as 2B of the Acts Interpretations Act 1901, put your administration on Norfolk Island. You cannot claim you are injured by being removed, as it’s your law that puts you there and nowhere else.
11. Actus me invito factus non est meus actus – An act done by me against my will is not my act.
By forcing incorporation on babies that lasts the duration of their life without disclosure or payment, when discovered, means you have no ability to presume they are acting in any way to consent to your undisclosed contract. Mere compliance cannot be construed as consent. See article 1. This maxim would be used to counter “he who enters the court corrects the false name,” if done under the impending duress of threat of arrest if one does not attend the tribunal.
12. actus servi in iis quibus opera ejus comminiter adhibita est actus domini habetur – The act of a servant in those things in which he is usually employed is considered the act of his master.
This one should scare you; this is command responsibility. When your goon police and crony judges commit slavery by forcing the victim into slavery, by forced incorporation by the use of the Crown artwork as their identity when they do not consent, is your crime as well. This is embodied in your legislation 11.2(1) of the Criminal Code Act 1995. If the jurist was ever able to locate a court of competent jurisdiction this maxim would make you guilty of 27 million counts of slavery. Luckily for you all the courts have now fraudulently converted into Unidroit tribunals. If the people ever formed a court of their own, you are in serious trouble.
13. a digniori fieri debet denominatio et resolutio – The denomination and explanation should be made from the more worthy.
The cunning jurist would use this to force the tribunal to accept the evidence of the style manuals as the authority for what a name is over you …well, you got nothing. The styles manuals are more worthy than you….
14. Ad recte docendum oportet primum inquiere nomina quia rerum cognitio a nominibus rerum dependet – In order to rightly comprehend a thing, it is necessary first to inquire into the names, for a right knowledge of things depends upon their names.
You’re not even using names.
15. affectio tua nomen imponit yuo – your motive gives a name to your act
You want to own people, all of them, so that’s called slavery.
16. Alienatio licet prohibeatur, consensu tamen omnium in quorum favorum prohibita est potest fieri; et quilibet potest renunciare juri pro se introducto – Even if alienation is prohibited, it may yet take place by the consent of all in whose favor it is prohibited: it is in the power of anyone to renounce a right introduced for his own benefit
All your business takes place under this maxim. All “citizens” have renounced the right to Nationality by alienating themselves by joining your corporation. This is a foreign allegiance. Of course, you have to presume consent and you have not disclosed where or what Australia or any Nation actually is.
17. a piratis aut latronibus pro completo habatur – Those captured by robbers and pirates remain free.
You are a robber and a pirate (slavery is part of piracy). Despite your claims of consent, you will be liable and charged with slavery and piracy if you disregard article 1.
18. A piratis et latronibus capta dominium non mutant – Things captured by robbers and pirates do not change ownership.
You own nothing and all the property in estate can be retrieved. Make sure there are no de jure courts to allow the benefactors to have their estates returned. If you are not using trust law as mentioned previously you are simply committing slavery and have no recourse to the protection of law.
19. Argumentum ab auctoritate fortissimum in lege – An argument drawn from authority is the strongest in law.
Once again this empowers the authorities herein. This empowers styles manuals, dictionaries, your laws, which may come back to bite you. This also empowers you own precedents such as R. Wei Tang HCA. (a case on slavery by forced contract.)
20. Arma in armatos sumere jura sinut – the laws permit taking up arms against the armed.
Shooting your police is legal, as they are foreign allegiance corporate invaders, despite them coming from here. They are interfering with the protected people of the land by slavery, as they have invaded on behalf of a private foreign power. The system is basically an invasion by a private military in a mixed war by using the people they invaded to invade. Whilst they are members of your military they are bound by your laws, when they leave by returning identity documents and not taking a benefit you cannot engage with them. Since your police are using hollow point ammunition this is a war crime.
21. Assignatus utitur jure autoris – the rights of the assignee is clothed with the rights of the principle.
Your police only have the rights you have. Since you are a private foreign corporation, your police can only be foreign private corporate police. While a victim is in your private jurisdiction by holding your identity documents you have jurisdiction, as soon as they don’t your police lose qualified immunity and can be charged with very serious crimes, as can you.
22. A verbis legis non est recedendum – from the words of the law there should be no departure.
When you Justices etc. depart from the words of the law as Steward J of the HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA tribunal did when he offended 25D and 34(AA) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 and Section 155 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cwth) in Rohan Lorian v Crown in Right of New South Wales 52/2023 you are going to arouse suspicion that you are not actually the government. Justice must be seen to be done (Just never actually do it.)
23. beneficium invitio non datur – a privilege or benefit is not granted against a person’s will.
You cannot offer some crap consideration to be trustee such as medicare and the dole and expect a person to accept that as payment to be trustee, especially if they don’t use it. When the benefit is denied, you cannot force it to prove consent.
24. beneficium of a principis debet esse mansurum – the benefaction of a prince ought to be lasting
Don’t ever let them know they are the prince/princess (principal benefactor). This is in Article 1 of the Human Rights declaration. Their benefaction will last only as long as you can get them to hold your
identity. Otherwise, you must pay back what you stole, restore the estate and pay interest. (authors view as no further information can be sourced).
25.
Glossary

A Guide to Modern Slavery by Rohan (pdf)