(Thanks, T. :)

Reader T. writes:

=====

The question was raised but never addressed. Is it not the trust indenture that identifies the Parties, their relationship one to the other, their rights, duties, liabilities and remedies? Is the trust indenture not the law of the trust?

TWEA identifies the Parties, their relationship one to the other, their rights, duties, liabilities and remedies as concerns the Public Trust, therefore, is TWEA not the law of the Public Trust?

TWEA sets forth the entire process for obtaining a remedy including conditions precedent, jurisdiction, venue and who shall be named as Defendant, therefore, is TWEA not the law of the Public Trust?

TWEA is clear that our soul relief and remedy is via a suit in equity in the U S District Court against the Custodian of the Alien Property, who has been vested with the power and authority of a common law Trustee.

Soul relief and remedy is quite clear and leaves no room for alternatives. TWEA does not mandate an equity court but a Suit in Equity in the U S District Court. Could this be the missing link? The reason for our failure to obtain a remedy in the courts of equity?

Do these 4 words explain the failure to obtain the desired remedy in all of the old practices and processes? IF TWEA is in fact the public trust indenture then it certainly explains a great deal.

It would seem that the assumption that TWEA’s mandate of a Suit in Equity to mean a Bill in Equity in the Equity Courts is misplaced. TWEA clearly establishes the U S District Courts as the exclusive venue for obtaining our sole relief and remedy raising the question of how do we get equity jurisdiction in an at law court?

TWEA, the law of the trust, does NOT mandate an equity court nor equity jurisdiction, but it does set forth the path to obtaining an equitable remedy. Could it be that the district courts take on the characteristics of an equity court with the power and authority to span multiple jurisdictions to provide you an equitable remedy?

Is it possible that TWEA is the laws of the public trust for use by the private beneficiaries while the codes and statutes are the laws of the public trust for the Public Citizen?

Is it possible that when the court sees a complaint filed under section 4390(a) of TWEA that they understand this is a beneficial claim and automatically take on the characteristics of equity? Does invoking the court’s jurisdiction under section 4390(a) of TWEA instantly identify you as a beneficiary? A beneficiary who must first prove fulfillment of conditions precedent to establish STANDING?

Maybe I am missing something here, but it appears that TWEA contains all of the parts and parcels of a trust indenture from their power and authority to their duties and liabilities and our rights and remedies all rolled into one statute. What am I missing here?

****************************************************************