Patent Grants versus Treaties – by Tom Black

Published September 1, 2015
Tom-Black-Ontario-Landowners-Association

Tom Black

Hello Folks,

For many years now, the Ontario Landowners have promoted the Land Patent Grants (or Letters Patent) as a valuable part of our property rights granted to us in the Great Charter, The Magna Carta. We consider them to be a contract with the ‘crown’, sealed by the Great Seal and promising us, our heirs and assigns, the free and unobstructed use and control of our private property, forever.

Obviously there are restrictions on that private property as spelled out in common law that say we have to be good citizens and respect the rights of our neighbours.

One question that we are often asked is ‘what is the difference between patent grants and the native treaties.’ People ask “how come, if our grants are so good, they are not recognised as such by people, governments and courts”.

We all know how much importance natives place on their treaties. They have done a good job of revisiting the words in these agreements. Their children have gone to school and received law degrees and continued the fight to make sure that the promises that were made in the treaties, are fulfilled. Now, not all natives are in a daily battle to hold the government to their promises and maybe some native groups try to read more power into the words of the treaties than were originally intended or agreed upon, but for the most part, the native community stands together and present its case to government agencies and consulting committees and when those avenues stall, the natives go to court to present their cases.

Land Patent Grants (LPG’s) are the original agreement with the crown (same crown, same era as the treaties) that established the foundation of this country and are even more powerful than the treaties because they granted ownership of said land to private individuals. The treaties did not grant ownership to individual natives and so the land could not be used for collateral to borrow and build wealth through entrepreneurship. Still, the patents are fluffed off by politicians, lawyers and regular citizens as inconsequential. WHY? How can this be when Letters Patent are written to create every government office, including the governor general, every incorporated entity and every piece of private property that is severed from crown land and put into private ownership, even today?

The answer as always, is “human nature”! No matter how well constitutions are written to protect the rights of people, as soon as politicians get into power, they start to try and figure out a way to get around the rules so that they can do whatever they or their entourage of supporters want. This is not to suggest that politicians are all immoral, crooks and thieves. The majority, in my opinion, start out to do their very best to serve their constituents but the big government, political machine often camouflages and blurs the lines between right and wrong decisions. To that end, many politicians years ago, recognised that most immigrants coming to Canada, did not understand what they had in their Patent Grants and thus they could ignore those agreements and hide them away from the public so no one would ever challenge infringements by government agencies on private property. At the same time, worldwide attitude from the United Nations started to promote the idea that land was too important to be allowed to be owned and controlled by individuals, this being the gist of the words from Agenda 21.

The result has been complete ignorance of the agreements that were signed by the crown. We certainly understand why new immigrants coming to Canada would not have any grasp of our original documents but the fact is that people with 150 years of family heritage in this country are also unaware of those agreements. Lawyers tell us that no real time is spent teaching the virtues of the Patent Grants in university and certainly, people making laws now, completely ignore them.

So, why do Native Treaties stand as written and on the other hand Land Patent Grants are ignored? It is simple! The natives as a group, stand up for their treaties and the rest of us don’t stand up for the Patent Grants as a whole. Most of us have never heard of them, others are discouraged by lawyers and politicians and still others don’t want to be part of the controversy.

Let’s stand up together folks!

Divided we Fall!

Tom Black

17 Responses to “Patent Grants versus Treaties – by Tom Black”

  1. Gary September 14, 2015

    Bob Marcellus:

    There are a number of options that require knowledge of CL, the lower courts are not CL courts, they’re statutory and will ignore CL. You need to get to a court of record and understand that you’re a man, the creator of the Law, and the officials in the court are public servants.

    Indoctrination into CL is actually undoing the programming that society has burned into our mindsets, making us servants to our servants.

    Here’s a place to go to start into the undoing, Monday nights starting around 8pm are Canadians mostly helping each other with their CL approaches to solving their problems “lawfully”.

    http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=133802&cmd=tc

    Cheers,

  2. Ken Hughes September 6, 2015

    Hello Art and others for my spelling mistakes.The two words I was referring to are Demurrel and Allocution. For The Powers of Allocution. Check my paragraph and hope this helps clarify meaninings!

  3. Jason September 5, 2015

    The youtube link I posted shows what the NDP think of private property rights.

  4. Jason September 5, 2015
  5. Jean Thomas September 3, 2015

    This same story I hear again and again. I myself am going through the same thing. Join the OLA they have started a new group in Waterdown, lots of information on your rights.

  6. Chris Heinrich September 3, 2015

    I have 24 acres of property in Flamborough. It was always designated residential agricultural. I had noted that on tax some years back that it changed to 22.5 acres conservation 1.5 residential agricultural. Today all 24 acres is deemed conservation. They claim I cannot do anything with this property except continue to pay the taxes on it. I am surrounded by homes and even some kind of construction company behind my property. Across from me a new road was built right through wetlands to accommodate Pan American Nurseries. How did they get a permit to do this ? How is Milne construction applying for permits to build next to my property being even considered ? (I will bet everything I own they get it). Why cant I ? It is not like I am in the middle of a swamp or by myself in the bush somewhere. I am surrounded by homes and there is activity all around me but the Halton conservation authority has said a permit will never be given to you to build anything on this property. I have applied for and received my crown patent. I can’t understand a thing it says other than it was originally given to Captain William Hamilton. Can anyone help me decipher this to see if I have a chance at owning my property and not having it governed by this fascist conservation authority.

  7. Shirley Dolan September 3, 2015

    To Jim Malloy: Crown Land Patents can be obtained from the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry http://www.ontario.ca/environment-and-energy/crown-patents. This web page explains how to get the patent and provides an application form to fill out. You will need to know your township, lot and concession number, which are normally noted on your deed. If you require additional information, please contact us through our Contact page.

  8. Bob Marcellus September 3, 2015

    Spent 500 hrs over the past year researching the law and did not find anything that strikes down the Crown Patents.
    Went to court 5 times defending my legal use of my property, to have my defense totally ignored by the Justice.
    Learned that the Court of Provincial Offenses can only uphold the Provincial law, and cannot rule against it.
    So everyone we should not try to defend our land rights in these lower courts. They cannot Judge fairly.

    Quoting from the transcript from my hearing
    “only the S u p e r i o r Court could make a
    formal d e c l a r a t i o n o f i n v a l i d i t y . Only a Superior Court has t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n t o formally d e c l a re
    l e g i s l a t i o n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y invalid“
    The legislation in question is the Planning act of Ontario.
    There is one case attempting to have the case heard in Superior court. So I say let us all get behind these people by contributing to their costs and going to court with them. The OLA can coordinate this.

  9. Art Jefford September 3, 2015

    Ken Hughes

    (1)Re Judge “ruled my Crown Patent to be true and lawful”
    Great do you have a Court File reference?

    (2)Province Govt Officials
    “Province they have fraudulently used corporate statutes as laws since 1930”
    OKAY ..I agree these Provincial By Laws can only apply to Province or Crown assets … Except in my Queen Granted Titleholder lands to me, I am the Queens or Crown “Tenant in Chief” Her direct 1st authority of these granted lands (all separated lots and road access, and subject to Provincial control only after adequate consult and consent) (Province claims silence from Granted Titleholder is consent?)

    (3)DEMUR meaning is ….to disagree politely, and refuse to accept, with another person’s statement or request
    “tell them you are going to demur! This place the onus on them to prove they have the authority over you which many time they don,t!!”
    “This place the onus on them to prove they have the authority over you which many time they don,t!!”
    OKAY….I like That

    ( 4) aclumation (sp) or acclimation meaning?is to be accustomed to or adapt to?
    “You say aclumation (sp) ”
    OKAY I am not sure how becoming accustomed to Bully Government officials helps me in Court?

    (5) Common law Definition (also known as case law or precedent) is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals that decide individual cases, as opposed to statutes adopted through the legislative process or regulations issued by the executive branch.
    “To win in a statute court there is no Justice but if you learn Common Law as I have said through this story you have to scare the Judge!”
    OKAY in Crown Grants this seems to be we are using Feudal British established Manor lands Lordships Power to control his lands and to be able to challenge any Crown Government Official to be secondary to the Queens Granted “Tenant in Chief” or Assigned “Tenant” property rights

    Ken Hughes any comments ..
    I would like to talk to you about your experience in this ajefford@yahoo.com

  10. Ken Hughes September 2, 2015

    I have entered my Crown or Letter Patent notorized and certified to the courts as my defence.I had one billion Canadian dollars against the Judge and courts if he did not recognize as a true item dated 1825-1830 and he took two weeks and 3/4 of a day to come to a decision.He ruled my Crown Patent to be true and lawful But did not believe what was written!!!! Remember folks that this is 1700 old English and I had a translated copy for him to read which also said all armenent and tools to look after my lands!!! This is time for a large Commercial Lien!! I was reading on Common law a couple of interest words that being if someone from the Criminal armored corporation as known as the Province they have fraudulently used corporate statutes as laws since 1930 and if one that is in authority demands you reply or come to the police station tell them you are going to demur! This place the onus on them to prove they have the authority over you which many time they don,t!! The second point is when a Judge in statute court says before he sentences you he asks if you have anything to say—You say aclumation (sp) The powers of aclumation are very powerful and the judge will dismiss even a guilty person as this is COMMON LAW which is the real law since the tenth century and he is very afraid! To win in a statute court there is no Justice but if you learn Common Law as I have said thru this story you have to scare the Judge! Save these stories of truth!

  11. leeroy September 2, 2015

    When people start to realize that THEY ARE THE CROWN, only then will the world start to see change.
    The crown that people think is in charge is a FICTION,
    A BODY POLITIC, it only exists if you give it life.
    Power to the people, be your own crown!!

  12. Brad Bradshaw September 2, 2015

    I too have filed and received Crown Tittle and posted a sign stating such. It reads… PRIVATE PROPERTY under Crown Patent 1885. L3-F40: 91354
    Notice to the Principle is Notice to the Agents.
    DO NOT ENTER. SAHB2003201043.

    The first set of numbers are the registrations number on the certificate. The second set of numbers are my Lien number by which I registered against my Corporate Name (the straw man) whereby I now have official recognition of my given name.

  13. Jim Malloy September 2, 2015

    I do not have enough information regarding the original designation of my Niagara Falls property .Where do I go to get it.

  14. Art Jefford September 2, 2015

    FYI One of My Lord of The Manor Lordship Order(s) issued to My Municipal Officials over My Crown Granted Lands in my Contract with the Queen where I am the “Tenant in Chief” Subject only to the Queen’s Rights and not to her Government Officials
    …………
    In of The Manorial Court of Sundridge, in Almaguin Country, in the Judicial District of Parry Sound, Ontario, Canada Manority Court File # 20150727-02
    Before His Lordship Lord Jefford, of Sundridge in Almaguin Country,
    In The Matter of The Holding of The Sundridge Sunflower Festival, Triathlon and Regatta to be held on; His Lordships Manor Lands on August 7,8,9, 2015 Concerning; The Village of Sundridge Council failure to consult adequately and get the consent of the Lord of the Manor or seek permission to hold these activities on The Lordship’s Lands as Granted by Her Majesty The Queen as The “Tenant in Chief” of Lot 23 Concession 10 in Strong Township as 92 acres, planned and developed by His Lordship into being now known as The Village of Sundridge
    Upon Considering the following;
    (a) The inappropriately badly acting Village of Sundridge Council and their administered steward(s), assault upon the Manor House and Lordship(s) Family have been the cause and lead to this issue
    (b) This Sunflower Festival weekend was originally conceived and initiated by His Lordships Lady Anne to have a Market, and His Lordship Art to hold a Regatta and with the participation of one other originating Community Members Families son Clive Rennie desire to incorporate a Triathlon. Following the participation of many other Community members it has become an accomplishment many Community members can be very proud of it’s success today. It is thus very important that the Community Stewards our Village Council make every effort to make sure all the requirement to make this a success again this year is completed on time.
    (c) It is considered a requirement that the Village of Sundridge Council consult adequately and get the written consent and permission of the “Tenant in Chief” of these lands to be used for this activity
    Order
    To The Corporation of the Village of Sundridge c/o Council Mayor Lyle Hall
    It is hereby ORDERED that;
    The Village of Sundridge Council shall immediately (i) consult adequately and (ii) get the consent and all the necessary permission and permits are obtained before this event takes place in respect to this usage of the Sundridge Manor Lands
    It is specifically noted that; any continuance of Ghosting is an unacceptable action by any Manor steward, and to failure to act in accordance with this Manority ORDER will incur the trespassing penalties and any further inappropriate stewards actions will result in severe Lordships execution of our Monarch’s Crown granted powers to all Manor Lords (or Barons)

    Dated July 27, 2015
    His Lordship Arthur L. Jefford, Lord Sundridge in Almaguin Country
    in the Judicial District of Parry Sound, Ontario, Canada,
    113 Main Street, Sundridge, P. O. Box 709, P0A-1Z0
    Re; Village of Sundridge Council Breach of the Laws of our Manor Lands, in the past that has resulted in Manority Order 20150713-01
    In this dispute – Lord Art and Lady Anne as The Jefford Family Manor Lands Lordships are extremely concerned that; The Manor, Village of Sundridge Council Stewards have failed to act in the appropriate manner of their oath of office and to act for and serve all individual community members especially their Lords Family as The Crowns Granted “Tenant(s) in Chief” of these lands now known as The Village of Sundridge. To date The Lordship(s) have show respect toward the Village Council but in return have received nothing but Ghosting and Contempt from The Lordship(s) Stewards in the Village
    It is Clear That The following;
    Crown Patent Granted Establishments, Grants, and Precedents Apply to this Order
    The Lordship(s) of the Manor granted by Her Majesty The Queen clearly are the Titleholder(s) and “Tenant in Chief” of all the Crown Granted lands second only to the Queen in person
    As the “Tenant in Chief” Their Lordship(s) have lived in the big house called the manor house. Attached to it were many acres of grassland and woodlands called the park. These were the “demesne lands” which were for the personal use of the lord of the manor. Dotted all round were the enclosed homes and land occupied by the “tenants of the manor”. ( Lord Denning, in Corpus Christi College Oxford v Gloucestershire County Council [1983] QB 360) and routes or roads were set aside for the use of the Tenants private titleholder lands linking them up to move freely with in the manor and with in the Community
    The Lord of the Manor Lands sold to new community members building lots and transferred unto them their individual property lot Bundle of Rights all subject to the Crown, and Lord’s rule, authority and control of power on occasions of exercising their respective commands over The Crown and Lords stewards and tenants of the Manor lands (the passage of title in land by a system in which a landowner would give land to one person for the use of another. The common law of estates in land grew from this concept).
    However The Village of Sundridge by a Tenant private Corporation By-law have decided with out adequate consultation and obtaining consent To close & Stop up Part of their “ Tenant in Chiefs” Lord of The Manor Titleholder Lands and all Tenants in Common right of way Titleholder access routes or roads requires the Tenant in Chiefs or Lord of the Manors permission to do so.
    Their Lordship(s) Crown Titleholder Grant Patent Land as registered to the new Lordship(s) of the Manor Lands as “Tenant in Chief’s” Bundle of Rights Supreme Court of Canada established require adequate consultations and consent to erode any Canadians Freedom and Any Government must comply with all proportionality and Balancing Act specifications defined by The Supreme Court of Canada and His Lordships rule, authority and control of power on occasions of exercising their respective commands over The Lords Government Stewards and Tenants of the Manor lands
    Respectfully
    The Corporation of the Village of Sundridge Council as the Stewards for the Titleholders in the Community or Municipality are bound by Our Supreme Court of Canada Court Decisions and Clarifications of the Rule of Law in Canada as in; Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia, 2014 SCC 44, Citation (2014) 2 S.C.R. 256 Date 20140626 Doc. 34986  http://www.canadianprogressiveworld.com/2014/06/26/supreme-court-grants-land-title-tsilhqotin-first-nation/
    Established Titleholder Land Rights in Canada to be;
    The Supreme Court of Canada Landholder Titleholder Rights Test;
    Requires three things of Government to breach Titleholder Rights.
    The Supreme Court of Canada says title gives “the exclusive right to decide how the land is used, and the right to benefit from those uses. ” Federal and Provincial Governments, general economic development for prosperity and the benefit of Canadians could justify infringement of Titleholder but Governments must get the consent of titleholders, and justify the projects under clear criteria and meet a “PROPORTIONALITY TEST,”
    That test requires three thing a government must establish is necessary to achieve,
    (a) “compelling and substantial” public goal;
    (b) the law must go no further than necessary to achieve it; and
    (c) the benefits “that may be expected to flow from that goal are not outweighed by adverse effects on the titleholder interest.”
    “There’s a balancing act going on.” with Government Interests “title is not “an absolute right.”; Government “can infringe Canadians title, but in order to do that they must;
    (a) consult adequately and
    (b) they must have a substantive and compelling legislative objective.”
    THIS TRUMPS ANY LATER ENACTED CONTRAVENING LEGISLATION
    To The Corporation of the Village of Sundridge Council Most Respectfully is ORDERED to comply with The Supreme Court defined limiting Government rights that exist only Nationally and Provincially and as all Canadian Titleholder Lands are Crown Titleholder Grant Patents or the equivalent as The Supreme Court of Canada has defined Canadians Rights and Freedoms as defined above apply in this Sundridge Sunflower Festival weekend issue. (Adequate consultation and consent)
    It is Respectfully noted that a show of Respect to the Lord of the Manor by all Stewards and Tenants of The Manor Lands should in every way be at a minimum standard of quality, equal to the show of Respect given to The Lords in our Canadian Judicial Court System ( ruler.[1][2] The appellation can also denote certain persons who hold a title of the peerage in the United Kingdom, or are entitled to courtesy titles. The collective “Lords” can refer to a group or body of peers.)  
    It is also Respectfully noted that the Crown Granted power to Lord of the Manor over the lands he presided and upon direction to his Stewards and Tenants of The Manor Lands, Their Lord was a man who commanded on occasion the power of exercising capital punishment over them

    The title of “Lord of the Manor” is recognized by the British Government, in the form of the Her Majesty’s Land Registry, as one of three elements of a manor that can affect[clarification needed] Land Registry.[4] Modern legal cases have been won by persons claiming rights as lords of the manor over village greens. The heads of many ancient English land-owning families have continued to be lords of the manor of lands they have inherited. (for example a former prime minister who becomes an Earl, is always created a baron or lord at the same time, by historic precedent. Indeed the peerage was anciently termed the baronage before the higher degrees were created.) (Justices of the Canadian provincial Supreme Courts, addressed in Court as “My Lord” or “My Lady” and referred to in legal literature as “Lordships” or “Ladyships”).
    Respectfully The Corporation of The Village of Sundridge Council Members Can Not Just Seize these Titleholder Manor Lands and Pass private Corporation Bylaws that apply only to the Corporation and for the Corporation only, and if doing so in the name of the Crown upon application as is being made herein must immediately return each and every seizure as defined and Crown agreed to below
    On June 15, 1215 King John of England to his Barons, Justices, Stewards, and all subjects, for the health of our soles and those of our ancestors and heirs, and to the better ordering of our kingdom  contractually agreed  to all the terms in the Magna Carta
    The Magna Carta + (39) No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land. + (40) To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.
    Respectfully;
    For The Village of Sundridge Council to; change the Rights of the Titleholder Lands, The Lord of the Manor as Tenant in Chief (a) must be adequately consulted (b) must get the consent of Titleholder Tenant in Chief, and Titleholder Tenants (c) justify the projects under clear criteria
    All Canadians Titleholders normality of showing respect and confidence in, all our levels of Government and Officials, feel Government Official now holds Contempt for it’s citizens and Officials have now failed in showing citizens respect, to the point that we now feel we have been betrayed by a traitorous Government intent on eroding our life sacrificing Freedoms. As Canadians we respectfully remained silent believing each and every one of these Government Officials would act in according to their Oath of Office to Act For and Serve each and every citizen. Recently however it appears our Manor Lords or Barons have remained to silent to long in effect showing confidence of their Stewards  in every level of our Nation and Governmental system from; Our Senators, in our Upper Level of The House of Parliament in Canada; and to; Our Members of Parliament (MP`s) in The Lower House of Parliament, and to; Our Members of Provincial Parliament (MPP`s); and to; Our Municipal Members of Council in this Case The Corporation of the Village of Sundridge; and to All Our other engaged , employed, and Contracted Government Officials who have been acting badly
    Lordships of the Manor as they exist today in the British Empire property law are part of the history of England dating back to 1066 and within the Manor there are three elements collectively called an  Honour (1) the lordship or dignity – this is the title granted by the manor, (2) the manorial – this is the manor and its land, (3) the seignory – these are the rights granted to the holder of the manor and the holder rights over land. Respectfully, The Lordship does have the duty, responsibility, and capacity to hold badly acting manor citizens and stewards accountable, and although in Canada Lordships have not taken such an active participation other than as a vested community member, the lordship does hold the manor power to hold Court to address any and all tenants concerns   
    Respectfully The Lord may hold Manorial Court, with the Lord of the Manor as Chairman These courts, known as courts baron, dealt with the tenants’ rights and duties, changes of the occupancy, and disputes between tenants or stewards. Some manorial courts also had the status of a court leet, and so they elected constables and other officials and were effectively Magistrates Courts for minor offences of the tenants, elected and appointed officials.

    Dated July 27, 2015
    His Lordship Arthur L. Jefford, Lord Sundridge in Almaguin Country
    in the Judicial District of Parry Sound, Ontario, Canada
    113 Main Street, Sundridge, P. O. Box 709, P0A-1Z0
    E-mail ajefford@yahoo.com Tel # 705-38601999
    To The Corporation of The Village of Sundridge Council
    Re Manority ORDER 20150727-02
    Re Village of Sundridge Sunflower Festival and Triathlon August 7,8,9, 2015
    Council private Corporation By-law Stop up and Blockage of Manor Lands with out “Tenants in Chief”, Lordship(s) written permission for their erosion of Canadian Rights and Freedoms
    ABSOLUTELY NO TRESPASSING is permitted on Any Manor Lands where a private Corporation Bylaws are used erode Canadian Rights and Freedoms; to stop up the Crown Granted Manor “Tenant in Chief” Manor Lands with out His Lordships being adequately consulted with written consent
    ALL TRESPASS ON THIS PROPERTY IS PROHIBITED as defined and clarified by Titleholder Rights with out Officials executing due diligence
    BY HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN CROWN LAND PATENT and MANOR LAND LORD’S “TENANT IN CHIEF” STANDING ORDER herein and as
    THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA as defined in http://www.canadianprogressiveworld.com/2014/06/26/supreme-court-grants-land-title-tsilhqotin-first-nation/
    The Supreme Court of Canada Landholder Titleholder Rights Test
    Requires 3 Elements for the Government to breach Titleholder Rights
    The Supreme Court of Canada says title gives “the exclusive right to decide how the land is used, and the right to benefit from those uses.
    ” Federal and Provincial Governments, general economic development for prosperity and the benefit of Canadians could justify infringement of Titleholder but Governments must get the consent of titleholders, and justify the projects under clear criteria and meet a
     “PROPORTIONALITY TEST,” That test requires three thing a government must establish is necessary to achieve, Requirement (a) “compelling and substantial” public goal; Requirement (b) the law must go no further than necessary to achieve it; and Requirement (c) the benefits “that may be expected to flow from that goal are not outweighed by adverse effects on the titleholder interest.”
     “There’s a balancing act going on.” with Government Interests “title is not “an absolute right.”; Government “can infringe Canadians title, but in order to do that they must
    (a) consult adequately and (b) they must have a substantive and compelling legislative objective.”
    THIS TRUMPS ANY LATER ENACTED CONTRAVENING LEGISLATION
    TO TRESPASS or BREACH OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY ENDANGERS YOUR LIFE AND OTHERS. The Village of Sundridge Council Members and appointed Officials personally acknowledge any and all Trespassers who trespass with out the required consultation and consent The Sundridge Officials AGREE TO PAY $100,000.00 FOR EACH TRESPASS BREACH
    This Titleholder(s) Order prohibits any negligent Official to permit trespass on our private property
    Report all violations to; Arthur L. Jefford ajefford@yahoo.com Manor Lord (705-386-9199)

  15. Art Jefford September 2, 2015

    FYI My No Trespassing signs defining my Crown Land Titleholder Patent Property Rights

    ABSOLUTELY NO TRESPASSING
    Govt Paid Bully Enforcement Official …This means YOU
    ALL TRESPASS ON THIS PROPERTY IS PROHIBITED as defined and clarified by Titleholder Rights
    BY HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN CROWN LAND PATENT and MANOR LAND LORD’S TENANT IN CHIEF STANDING ORDER and
    THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA as defined in http://www.canadianprogressiveworld.com/2014/06/26/supreme-court-grants-land-title-tsilhqotin-first-nation/
    The Supreme Court of Canada
    Landholder Titleholder Rights Test
    Requires 3 Elements for the Government to breach Titleholder Rights
    The Supreme Court of Canada says title gives “the exclusive right to decide how the land is used, and the right to benefit from those uses.
    ” Federal and Provincial Governments, general economic development for prosperity and the benefit of Canadians could justify infringement of Titleholder but Governments must get the consent of titleholders, and justify the projects under clear criteria and meet a
    “PROPORTIONALITY TEST,” That test requires three thing a government must establish is necessary to achieve, Requirement (a) “compelling and substantial” public goal; Requirement (b) the law must go no further than necessary to achieve it; and Requirement (c) the benefits “that may be expected to flow from that goal are not outweighed by adverse effects on the titleholder interest.”
    “There’s a balancing act going on.” with Government Interests “title is not “an absolute right.”; Government “can infringe Canadians title, but in order to do that they must
    (a) consult adequately and (b) they must have a substantive and compelling legislative objective.”
    THIS TRUMPS ANY LATER ENACTED CONTRAVENING LEGISLATION
    THIS MEANS YOU
    TO TRESPASS or BREACH OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY ENDANGERS YOUR LIFE AND OTHERS
    ALL TRESPASSERS ACKNOWLEDGE PROPERTY POSTINGS AND AGREE TO PAY $100,000.00 FOR EACH AND EVERY TRESPASS BREACH
    This Titleholder(s) prohibits any Government paid Official to trespass on our private property
    Report all violations to; Arthur L. Jefford ajefford@yahoo.com Manor Lord (705-386-9199)

  16. Hannah and Alan Wielenga September 2, 2015

    We have just found our and are waiting on certified copies. I did read them, not easy, can’t quite understand exactly what it says, but are very excited and feel like we have some power back over our rights to our land. Have been hassled and harassed by our municipality, mainly the official planner, and lower trent conservation, for about 10 years! Finally enough! Hopefully with the help of a lawyer we will understand what it means for our land, and we can tell them to leave us alone for good! Thanks so much for all the helpful info and encouragement from the OLA, keep on truckin!!

  17. Grace Joubarne September 2, 2015

    Possibly my story will spur property owners to get their Letters Patent and a full title search all the way back to the Letters Patent…this should be a priority.

    I applied for the Crown Patent on my Belleville property after being told that the fact my building had two municipal addresses, school tax options for two properties and so on was not important. My place was a single family dwelling because the Planner at City Hall said it was a single family dwelling and in Belleville, apparently what he says goes.

    Well, I have now not one, but two Letters Patent and it is clear from the Letters Patent and the title search that my property has always been a semi-detached with separate municpal addresses and so on. Further, each side can be owned by separate people or the same person.

    Now, if I had not acquired those Letters Patent, I would have been scammed into literally giving up one of my properties! It was the best $50.00 I ever spent.


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

E-Newsletter!
Get all the latest OLA news
delivered monthly right to your inbox!