• Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
  • There are no markets
  • "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Sovereign Citizenship By Scott Eric Rosenstiel


Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2010
Rocky Mountains
Sovereign Citizenship
By Scott Eric Rosenstiel


Sovereign Citizenship is the status held by our forefathers. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and everyone else who won their freedom from the British Empire had this status. It was the birthright of all Americans, and we were generous in extending this most important right to foreign-born persons through the naturalization laws. With this status, our unalienable rights of life, liberty, and property couldn't be infringed. During the Civil War a method was discovered by the leading attorneys, financiers, and politicians of the day to deprive us of this status. Fortunately, we can get it back. This brings us to the question, "What are we getting back?" What does it mean to be a Sovereign Citizen? The word "sovereign" is defined in the 6th edition of Black's Law Dictionary, published in 1990, as being, "A person, body, or state in which independent authority is vested; a chief ruler with supreme power; a king or other ruler in a monarchy." Prior to the War for American Independence, the British king was the sovereign and the American people were his subjects. The war's outcome changed all this:

The sovereignty has been transferred from one man to the collective body of the people - and he who before was a "subject of the king" is now "a citizen of the State." State v. Manuel, North Carolina, Vol. 20, Page 121 (1838)

Thus, the people became Citizens of their respective states. But more importantly, for the first and only time in recorded history, the people were recognized as being the true sovereigns:

It will be sufficient to observe briefly, that the sovereignties in Europe, and particularly in England, exist on feudal principles. That system considers the prince as the sovereign, and the people as his subjects; it regards his person as the object of allegiance... No such ideas obtain here; at the revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects... and have none to govern but themselves... Chisholm v. Georgia, Dallas" Supreme Court Reports, Vol. 2, Pages 471, 472 (1793)

Each individual, at least so far as respects his unalienable rights is his own sovereign. These rights weren't given to any government. In fact, they can't be. Perhaps you can give up all of your rights, if you so choose, but who has the power to give your rights up for you? In America, no one can, because we're all equal. In American this principle of popular sovereign is recognized by all governments - state and federal. When the states became independent, the state governments were formed, all of them based on the authority of the people, and not the will of one man or a small body of men. The federal government as we know it today was created in 1789 when the federal constitution went into effect. The constitution mentioned something previously unknown in American law: Citizenship of the United States:

The term, citizens of the United States, must be understood to intend those who were citizens of a state, as such, after the Union had commenced, and the several states had assumed their sovereignties. Before this period there was no citizens of the United States... Manchester v. Boston, Massachusetts Reports, Vol. 16, Page 235 (1819) Thus a Citizen of a state is, by the federal constitution, made a Citizen of the United States. This means the following:

A citizen of one state is to be considered as a citizen of every other state in the union. Butler v. Farnsworth, Federal Cases, Vol. 4, Page 902 (1821)
A Citizen of any one of the states is considered and treated as being a Citizen of all of them. The phrase "Citizen of the United States" does not refer to a separate class of citizenship:

A citizen of any one of the States of the Union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the United States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing. To conceive a citizen of the United States who is not a citizen of some one of the States, is totally foreign to the idea, and inconsistent with the proper construction and common understanding of the expression as used in the Constitution, which must be deduced from its various other provisions. Ex parte. - Frank Knowles, California Reports, Vol. 5, Page 302 (1855)

Because of the principles enunciated in the above cases and others like them, it's correct to say that the American people are Citizens of our respective states. But we're more than this. We're in a very real sense Citizens of all the states. We are, in the greatest sense, and proudly so, Citizens of the several United States. This brings us to what are considered as being the rights inherent in Citizenship in America:

When men entered into a State they yielded a part of their absolute rights, or natural liberty, for political or civil liberty, which is no other than natural liberty restrained by human laws, so far as is necessary and expedient for the general advantage of the public. The rights of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring and protecting reputation and property, - and, in general, of attaining objects suitable to their condition, without injury to another, are the rights of a citizen; and all men by nature have them. Douglass, Adm'r., v. Stephens, Delaware Chancery, Vol. 1, Page 470 (1821)

These are the rights inherent in Sovereign Citizenship. So long as we remained Citizens, they couldn't be taken away from us. So the key was to take our Citizenship away from us.

ARTICLE #2: Fourteenth Amendment Citizenship

If you look through the copy of the United States constitution found in the 1990 edition of Black's Law Dictionary, you'll notice something very interesting. The word "Citizen" is always capitalized until you get to the fourteenth amendment, which was adopted in 1868. After that, it's no longer capitalized. This isn't an isolated occurrence either. In the definition of "Dred Scott Case," a supreme court case decided before the fourteenth amendment, they capitalize "Citizen," but everywhere else in the dictionary, where it refers to the laws of today, the word isn't capitalized. As you shall see, this is just one small indicator of many that the fourteenth amendment created a new class of citizen. This is certainly no secret to the legal community. In fact, under the definition of "Fourteenth Amendment" it says, "The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States... creates... a citizenship of the United States as distinct from that of the states..." This class of "citizen of the United States" was new; it was unknown to the constitution prior to 1868. This wasn't the status of our forefathers. In the first sentence of the definition of "United States" found in Black's, it says, "This term has several meanings." Pursuing this further, we find that one of the definitions is the "collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution." This is what the framers of the constitution meant by "Citizen of the United States" - that is, the Citizen of one state is to be considered and treated as a Citizen of every other state in the union. Used in another sense, though, the term is simply the name of the federal government. This is what is meant by "citizen of the United States in the fourteenth amendment":
Privileges and immunities clause of Fourteenth Amendment protects only those rights peculiar to being citizen of federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship. Jones v. Temmer, Federal Supplement, Vol. 829, Page 1227 (1993)

From the authorities above, we can see that the fourteenth amendment created citizenship of the federal government. This status is a privilege granted by the government:

Citizenship is a political status, and may be defined and privilege limited by Congress. Ex Parte (NG) Fung Sing, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 6, Page 670 (1925)

It goes without saying that the federal government can regulate the privileges it creates. By definition, "citizenship" is the basis of a person's relationship with the government. In the legal sense, everything else is built upon it. Therefore, since fourteenth amendment citizenship is a privilege, every aspect of the citizen's life could potentially be regulated. Worst of all, this new class of citizen does not have the right to invoke the protections of the Bill of Rights, as explained in the following supreme court case:

We have cited these cases for the purpose of showing that the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal Constitution against the powers of the Federal government. They were decided subsequently to the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment... Maxwell v. Dow, 176 US 598 (1900)

This isn't an idea peculiar to the turn of the century either. Going back to the "Jones" case, which was decided in 1993, we find the courts of today saying, "The privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates any of the Bill of Rights not protects all rights of individual citizens." Although fourteenth amendment citizens have no guaranteed access to the Bill of Rights, the amendment itself does state that they have certain "privileges and immunities." Here's what the supreme court has decided they are:

Privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, on the other hand, are only such as arise out of the nature and essential character of the national government, or are specifically granted or secured to all citizens or persons by the Constitution of the United States. Slaughter-House Cases, supra, p.79; Re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436, 448, 34 L.ed. 519, 524, 10 Sup. Ct.Rep. 930; Duncan v. Missouri, 152 U.S. 377, 382, 38 L.ed. 485, 487, 14 Sup.Ct.Rep. 570. Thus, among the rights and privileges of national citizenship recognized by this court are the right to pass freely from state to state (Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35, 18 L.ed. 75); the right to petition Congress for a redress of grievances (United States v. Cruikshank, supra); the right to vote for national officers (Ex parte Yarbrough, 110 U.S. 651, 28 L.ed. 274, 4 Sup.Ct.Rep. 152; Wiley v. Sinkler, 179 U.S. 58, 45 L.ed. 84, 21 Sup.Ct. Rep. 17); the right to be protected against violence while in the lawful custody of a United States marshall (Logan v. United States, 144 U.S. 263, 36 L.ed. 429, 12 Sup.Ct. Rep. 617); and the right to inform the United States authorities of violation of its laws (Re Quark, 158 U.S. 532, 39 L.ed. 1080, 15 Sup.Ct.Rep. 959). Twining v. New Jersey, 211 US 78 (1908)

As discussed in the last article, Sovereign Citizens created government to guarantee them their rights. In contrast, it would seem from the above that the federal government created fourteenth amendment citizenship to guarantee its power. As a side note, this amendment has always been controversial. Many people over the years have questioned the amount of power it vests in the federal government. Some have even questioned its validity. On one occasion Judge Ellett of the Utah supreme court remarked:

I cannot believe that any court, in full possession of its faculties, could honestly hold that the amendment was properly approved and adopted. State v. Phillips, Pacific Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 540, Page 941, 942 (1975)

However, the most important fact about this amendment is that, although it created a new class of citizen, it did not have any effect on Sovereign Citizens. Both classes still exist:

When the Constitution was adopted the people of the United States were the citizens of the several States for whom and for whose posterity the government was established. Each of them was a citizen of the United States at the adoption of the Constitution, and all free persons thereafter born within one of the several States became by birth citizens of the State and of the United States. (Mr. Calhoun in his published work upon the Constitution denied that there was any citizenship of the United States in any other sense than as being connected with the government through the States.)

The first attempt by Congress to define citizenship was in 1866 in the passage of the Civil Rights Act (Revised Statutes section 1992, 8 United States Code Annotated section 1). The act provided that:

"All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power are declared to be citizens of the United States."

And this in turn was followed in 1868 by the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, United States Code Annotated Amendment 14, declaring:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Perkins v. Elg, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 99, Page 410 (1938), affirmed by supreme court at 307 US 325 (1939)

Both classes of citizen still exist. It's your right to be a Sovereign Citizen, while it's a privilege to be a fourteenth amendment citizen, and most importantly, it's up to you to determine which one you are, and which one you want to be.

Allegiance is the missing link


This may be the most important article that you have ever read! It deals with your legal status that determines whether you have unalienable rights or just corporate granted privileges. Most Americans think that they have unalienable rights protected by the Constitution. They also think that when they vote they are in fact electing officials to manage their government under Constitutional principles. Most people think that lawyers and judges practice law under a judicial system. Most people think that the government has no boundary. Well most people have relied upon government controlled schools and the media for their information and they have been misinformed!


The Declaration of Independence of 1776 is the cornerstone of America. It outlined grievances against the King and proclaimed actions to set the inhabitants free. This was followed by a Constitution for the united States of America. The Colonies/States refused to accept the Constitution without numerated Articles of Rights to be included. This was accomplished in 1791 where Ten specific Articles were included. Now we had a more perfect Union where specified powers were delegated to the Federal Government and the States and the people retained all powers not specifically delegated. The people enjoyed Liberty with unalienable rights, prosperity, and the Common Law. The Constitution was a model for the world to follow. At last people had power over government and were no longer serfs to a King or Dictator. They enjoyed a pure Republic for America.

When we read the Declaration of Independence today, year 2000, we find essentially the same grievances today as the People of the Colonies had in 1776. The inhabitants or citizens have no unalienable Rights, they have no Common Law, they have no law, only 'color of law', no judicial system, poor education, always entangled in some war, no sound money system, and they are taxed to the hilt. They are serfs on their own property. In fact they do not have a Republic! They now live under a Democracy! What happened that made full circle back to 1776? Is the old saying true; Everything that goes around, comes around? Our problem today is the same as the People of the Colonies had with England in 1776.

The Unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America: CLICK HERE

The Problem:

The problem that caused full circle lies in the original Constitution. It is Article I, Section 8, Clause (17): Powers of Congress:

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of congress, become the seat of government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings; and (18) To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

The foregoing exclusive delegated power is the authority to do anything the legislature desires to do within the District (Federal Zone) without Constitutional restraints. The legislature has taken advantage of those delegated powers for their personal and political benefits. In 1861, during the Civil War, Congress adjourned sine die. That term means forever, never to return. The Republic was under Martial Law and President Lincoln appointed representatives for the southern states and forced the legislature to again sit. The 13th Article of Amendment pertaining to Nobility was removed from the Constitution and replaced with a new Article of Amendment that prohibited slavery. That Article was ratified on December 6, 1865. In 1868 the rump legislature incorporated the District as a private municipal corporation. The charter was revised slightly in 1871. Following the incorporation of that government, the legislature adopted the 14th Amendment and promulgated a Civil Rights Act to give privileges to it's new inferior class of U.S. citizens. The results of these Acts were the end of the Republic and the beginning of the Democracy - and they were Constitutional for the Federal Zone They changed the form of our government. The 14th Amendnt made U.S. citizens? out of American Citizens and also made them subject to the legislature. A government of 'we, for, and of the people' came to an end. The corporate Democracy has its own Constitution (Constitution of the United States}. The Articles of Amendments from 12 upward are of the Democracy and not the Republic. The Organic Constitution only had 12 Amendments and the Democracy has added many. Now we have two United States with different Constitutions.

Which one do you hold allegiance to?

How you were enticed into the Democracy!

It was the carrot and stick method. The corporation had both and the people were hungry. Mass mind control exercised through the media played its part. The government would take care of its subjects regardless of cost. People never pondered long enough to figure out that governments have nothing but what they can con the people out of. Slogans such as: Take from the rich and give to the poor. What happens when the rich gets poor Can you really be an employer without the resources to pay for labor and materials Not very long! Anyway, the people were going to be looked after in old age. All they had to do was to become a U.S. citizen and thus give up all their unalienable rights, and pay a very small premium for social insurance. Additionally they were agreeing to become a Taxpayer. What a bargain! They became a Taxpayer for any kind of tax, The became a new U.S. citizen? with all those Civil Rights extended by Congress, and they also got the privilege of abiding by any color of law statute, rule, or regulation that might be promulgated throughout their life span. What a deal!! I missed one, they have the privilege to support people in foreign nations as well!

Citizenship- a legal or lawful status

The government never had citizens or subjects before the 14th Amendment was adopted. Thus a new class of inferior citizenship was created. In fact such is a statutory U.S. citizen that is subject to all the rules, regulations and statutes drafted by the corporation under color of law. What was the motive for creating this new class of citizenship? Was it because the Legislature thought they could extend their Jurisdiction into the foreign states, or was it because the Freed men had no legal status after the 13th Amendment was enacted? The Blacks being slaves did not have legal status under the law.

It is interesting to note that the legislature covered their butt with a public law that allowed American Citizens to Bypass the 14th Amendment requirements with an Act concerning the Rights of American Citizens in foreign States. Keep in mind that the exclusive legislative authority granted was limited to the Federal Zone! American Citizens were in foreign states and not under the rule of the legislature. However, by deception they did accomplish their goal. What is wrong with being a corporate citizen? Nothing at all if you understand that you are no longer in the Republic with a Bill of Rights and are subject to all the corporate whims. Federal U.S. citizens have no unalienable rights, just statutory civil rights and government granted privileges, which include, voting, paying taxes, using funny money, welfare, Social Security, licenses, and control of your life. The American Citizen remains within the Republic, has unalienable rights, has common law, he is an elector, and can do anything without a license so long as he does not harm someone else. He possesses all his unalienable Rights. The difference being Liberty and Slavery!

Citizenship is a lawful status. No one can determine your status for you because that is a personal thing. You are what your are, therefore, you must act the part of your status. Others, based on your actions, will determine your status. The term presumption is applicable here. Ex: If you are seen fishing then it is presumed that you are a fisherman. Likewise, if you are seen operating an automobile then you are presumed to be a driver?- and when you enter their inferior court rooms, you are presumed to be a U.S. citizen. What is your allegiance to? Did anyone inform you that you had to give allegiance to the corporation? No, that was your decision. You are a U.S. citizen because you attested to that fact when you signed up for Social Security, voter registration, drivers license, filled out the 1040 tax forms, applied for a gun permit and etc. Thus you have exemplified your lawful status by those actions. You may see that the corporation offers many benefits to its citizens and you cannot get those benefits if you are not one of their members. You cannot straddle the fence and be both at the same time. There is not a court in this Country that would give you standing while straddling the fence. All natural persons born in this Country were born free as American Citizens but their lawful status changed with their first nexus with the corporation, like a birth certificate or something else. U.S. citizens not only have benefits, they have responsibility to pay the national corporate debts that paid for the benefits. By law you have a choice and it is yours to make.

What is the Choice?

If you like being a corporate member of the Democracy, then do nothing and retain your present legal status. In this case you are the slave and the legislature is the master.

If you desire to be an American Citizen, under the Republic with all unalienable rights restored and master of your government officers, then you can expatriate from the corporate Democracy.

The law: FORTIETH CONGRESS, Sess, II, Ch. 248,249,1868, CHAP.CCXLIX. - An Act concerning the Rights of American Citizens in foreign States.

Whereas the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and whereas in the recognition of this principle this government has freely Received emigrants from all nations, and invested them with the right of citizenship; and whereas it is claimed that such American citizens, with their descendants are subject of foreign states, owing allegiance to the governments thereof, and whereas it is necessary to the maintenance of public peace that this claim of foreign allegiance should be promptly and finally disavowed: Therefore,

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision of any offices of this government which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government.

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That all naturalized citizens of the United States, while in foreign states, shall be entitled to, and shall receive from this government, the same protection of persons and property that is accorded to native born citizens in like situations and circumstances.

Sec.3. And be it further enacted, That whenever it shall be made known to the President that any citizen of the United States has been unjustly deprived of his liberty by or under the authority of any foreign government, it shall be the duty of the President forthwith to demand of that government the reasons for such imprisonment, and if it appears to be wrongful and in violation of the rights of American citizenship, the President shall demand the release of such citizen, and if the release so demanded is unreasonably delayed or refused, it shall be the duty of the President to use such means, not amounting to act of war, as he may think necessary and proper to obtain or effectuate such release, and all the acts and proceedings relative thereto shall be as soon as practicable be communicated by the President to Congress. Approved July 27th, 1968.

Please note that a foreign state is any union state outside of the Federal Zone: i.e. Virginia, Maryland, California and etc. The state of Puerto Rico or Guam are not foreign because they belongs to the government. Also, each of the union states is foreign to each other.

How do you regain your Sovereignty? The answer is Simple use our Discharge & Redemption Program
We provide all the necessary forms needed to accomplish this very easily. Use the getting started links found in the left column on may pages of this site.


The Declaration of Independence
of the Thirteen Colonies
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained, and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For protecting them by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
*For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
*For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighboring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
*For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
*For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren.

*We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
*We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here.
*We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare.

That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown,

and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved;

and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce,

and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

The signers of the Declaration represented the new States as follows:

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton