Print this page
  Admiralty Law (also known as Maritime Law) is a system of law originally codified by the Republic of Venice from the 11th Century and subsequently refined over subsequent centuries governing the operation, ownership of vessels on the oceans, transport and insurance of cargo, commerce, bills, navigation, liability, liens and finance. Admiralty Law is the foundation of international law ultimately as "private law".  
     
  The "Beast" Out of the See  
  Few forms of law in operation in modern courts are wrapped in greater mystery than Admiralty Law, also known as Maritime Law. On the one hand, Admiralty Law appears fully disclosed, with various historical treaties, examples of historic acts of parliament and precedents. Yet, on the other hand, all courts throughout the world contain unmistakable references to maritime concepts such as “dock”, “docket”, “bill”, “vessel”, “birth”, “lien”, “bond” to name just a few.  
  When a man or woman makes the public claim that Maritime Law is a form of law that is used both “on the land” as well as the sea and in fact we are all subject to “maritime law” to some extent, such claims are often laughed down as ludicrous and the figment of conspiratorial musings. The fact that flags within American courts retain the admiralty gold trimmings, the fact that many dozens of crucial terms and symbols of court are wholly and entirely maritime is considered “pure coincidence” and historical acts of parliament that show the use of Maritime Law on the land considered antiquated and no longer applicable.  
  Indeed, when Admiralty and Maritime Law is raised as one of the key foundations of law used in the world today, it seems that both the media and any public commentators are at pains to deny such allegations at all cost, despite the overwhelming evidence in plain sight. So why deny the obvious? What is so special about Admiralty or Maritime Law that is very existence on the land is a cause of active denial?  
  These are some of the issues we hope to address in this brief discussion- A discussion about when the “beast” came from the sea onto the land, as we were once warned would happen.  
   
  The Odd Historical Origins of Maritime Law  
  The word Maritime comes from the early 13th century combination of two Latin words mari (sea) and timeo (fear) meaning literally “Sea of Fear” or “Fear of the (Holy) See– an extremely off word to define a form of law of the seas.  
  Indeed, the whole claimed history concerning Maritime and Admiralty Law is plagued with claims, missing original texts and huge gaps. For example, it is claimed that Admiralty Law owes its history to the fabled Rhodes laws, followed by Roman and Byzantine legal codes. Yet no primary text or evidence exists to support such claims.  
  As for the claims referring to Byzantine maritime law attributed to Justinian via the fraudulent Corpus Iuris Civilus created by the Jesuits at the end of the 16th Century, no credibility can be attributed to such claims.  
  There is the claim of the Trani manuscript called Ordinamenta et consuetudo maris (“Ordinances and Custom of the Sea”) allegedly from 1063. Yet this is an unsubstantiated and improvable claim from a wholly Venetian text called Statuta Firmanorum published by Doge Marcus Marcellus in 1507.  
  Then there is the claim of the alleged Rolls of Oléron as the first formal statement of maritime laws by Eleanor of Aquitaine around 1160 strangely promulgated by a Queen on a Island (Oléron) off the coast of France instead of her husband King Henry II of England who ascended the throne in 1154. Of course, like everything else associated with Maritime law, no primary text or evidence exists to prove Eleanor was such a legal pioneer. Instead we only have the word of the authors of the book “The judgment of the sea, of Masters, of Mariners and Merchants and all their doings” attributed to King Henry VIII in the 16th Century.  
  So if the claimed original texts of Admiralty Law are suspect and yet such law appeared almost “overnight” fully formed in England under Henry VIII, who was behind its creation? Why? and why has it been so important to hide its origin and influence?  
  To answer these questions, let us briefly review the peculiar nature of Admiralty Law.  
     
  The Laws of Parasite Merchants- The Law of Unequals  
  Throughout history, sustainable legal systems have all shared common traits, the most noticeable being the “Golden Rule” – being equality before the law. So imagine a system where instead of the golden rule, a system where those with the biggest bonds wins, where the owners of property responsible for damage can reduce and sometimes eliminate their liability, where goods and even vessels can be seized “lawfully” without fair hearing, where the right to trial before jury does not apply, where goods can be arbitrarily impounded and can only be freed until a bond is paid for bailment, where liens and other encumbrances may lawfully be issued without notifying the affected user of the goods or property, where certain “letters of marquee” may be issued to privateers to “lawfully” plunder goods and property and share the booty. That system is the law of the Parasite Merchants, the law of unequals and the essence of Admiralty Law constructed by the Venetians and their allies.  
  Admiralty Law scarcely resembles any form of ancient law of the land whatsoever, as it is over flowing with deliberate corruptions of the very principles of fair law, favoring the crafty merchant, not the honest merchant or consumer of goods.  
  The first example of deliberate corruption built into Admiralty Law is the concept of hidden liens and encumbrances which may be granted to a merchant or other third party claiming payment that may secretly lodge the lien and then order the ship seized or arrested, without proof of proper Notarial procedure to establish the credibility of the claim.  
  A further deliberate corruption within Admiralty Law directly linked to the creation of the concept of the ecclesiastical term “salvation” as the salvage of souls “lost to the (Holy) See” is the concept of salvage whereby pirates and other scavengers be granted a “Letter of Marque” to pillage and recover property claimed by the power issuing the Letter of Marque as “lawful piracy”.  
  Another deliberate corruption within Admiralty Law are the obscene concepts of 1st lodgment of a claim having greater rights than the greater injury and that the size of bonds determining the favor of the court, not necessarily the substance of the controversy.  
  But one of the most historic corruptions introduced in the 16th Century by the fully formed Admiralty Law of the Venetians was the concept that a merchant upon issuing a Bill of Lading may “monetize” the debt of payment by multiples – that is issue more than one draft bill against the Bill of Lading and if all Bills were accepted could receive three or more times the value of the goods. The Merchant, now a Merchant Banker only then needed to ensure they had sufficient funds to cover a call on a certain number of drafts and from that point on could “fractionalize” the real value- the original goods several times over. This is in essence the origin of the modern commercial (merchant) banking system. A concept based on a lie and fraud, made “lawful” under Admiralty Law.  
  Of course, such laws and concepts are no longer called Admiralty Law since the Law of the Merchants moved onto the land. They are now called Commercial Laws, Financial Laws and Uniform Commercial Codes (UCC).  
     
  The Laws that enable "Lawful Slavery"  
  So long as the “lawful” methods by which a system of global slavery could possibly exist into the 21st Century are not revealed, plausible deniability can be maintained and those that claim the world is enslaved to a few who control the largest merchant banks (reserve banks) can be happily dismissed.  
  However, the real and present danger when Admiralty Law is revealed, not just its “dumbed down” and streamlined successors such as commercial law and Uniform Commercial Codes (UCC), is it reveals the very apparatus by which billions if not hundreds of millions may be lawfully enslaved to merchants and their banks all completely “lawfully” without the truth of this slavery never having to be revealed.  
  So long as nations are encouraged to generate large public debts which their citizens ultimately owe, then under Admiralty Law, the “vessels” being the citizens and their “goods” being their rights can be lawfully seized, and liened without any disclosure to the citizens. This is precisely what has happened such as 1933 and will be happening again in the next two years based on the complete apathy and utter lemming like stupidity of most global consumers.  
  Yet, if you thought Admiralty Law could not get any worse, you are wrong. Because, globally and openly Admiralty Law is professed as being both “global” and “private”. It is a purely private law form, not owned by nations, nor the public but by the ancient Venetian merchant families that sponsored its inception and subsequent remodeling. So the law that runs global commerce is a law unto itself, a private law subject to change and deviation as those that control it deem fit to change.  
  There is no redemption in Admiralty. There is no salvage of such corrupt law.  
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
Copyright © One-Heaven.Org Ab Initio. All Rights Reserved