No Christmas for ObamaLand

Over the past few weeks I have posted additional material concerning the COLB forgery. I have posted one minor piece a bit  off key to keep one person off track. But I had a reason for this. While he has been  chasing his tail, I have been distributing material and statements to lawyers and other people.  As mentioned in my previous post, about this person and what steps I have taken. But as they say on tv “But wait there’s more”

Here is the Christmas present to all of ObamaLand and this lawyer.  

I have updated my previous post to include the origional image that was to be posted, but swapped to keep Loren Christopher Collins, Obot lawyer and George Soros little hack’s panties in a wad. When in reality the only thing that he did was to now push all the evidence into other peoples hand including my relatives who are personal  friends of Chuck and Sally Heath. I will leave it to the readers to find out who Chuck and Sally Heath are.

So all in ObotLand, you can thank Loren Christopher Collins for the information about the COLB forgery, including a much more detailed analysis and statements being in the hands of those who can really use it.

Obot Lawyer misrepresents the facts – what else is new

A lawyer claiming to know ‘something’ about images is pawning himself as a legitimate authority on the Obama COLB forgery. 

In my previous posts I have indicated that FactCheck #2 the one with out the SEAL is forged. Here is an image that he has posted upon his site.  Here is his claim ‘Seriously, to illustrate just how much Steve shrunk the image to suit his purposes, and how ridiculously small his image is compared to FactCheck’s original photo, here’s a side-by-side comparison of how Steve’s image compares to the size of the original FactCheck image it’s derived from:”

In reality, I resized the image for posting only a reference image only and allowed the readers to judge for themselves by downloading the FactCheck image off FactCheck’s own web-site. So there would no confusion and accusation of altering their image. This way the people could judge for themselves, unlike a Lawyer manipulating  and twisting facts. This blog host only allows for a maximun size of 575 x 478 within the posts. The origional size as mentioned is 2304 x 3072, so his claim of 3% is again showing his lies and ignorance, and stupidity.

Update: An Obot lawyer, who is too stupid and arrogant to realize that the image above, has been resized, by this blog hosting. Has decided to post a comparison image. The image below demonstrates that the FactCheck people used to verify the COLB were not only inexperienced, but were deceptive as well. They were not qualified to even photograph the document and took every effort to decieve anyone looking at it, just like the questionable lawyer. Regardless of the level of focus that the deranged lawyer is pawning, there are no defects from the embossing that are visible in other images. Since he can’t explain that away, he’s throwing a temper tantrum, besides it’s great watching him take the bait. 

However just to prove the lawyer wrong again and show his lies.

Again proving my point that the FactCheck images are large in size and would indicate any defects of embossing as they show clearly all the other defects, lettering, ect.

Only one question needs to be asked; why is every other item and defect detected in this image with the exception of the SEAL. Why is ALL the lettering, including the date indicated, but no evidence of the SEAL.

Or under various filters the same, every letter and defect is dected, with the exception of ANY evidence of an embossed seal, and that is a fact.

Once again, Obot lawyer caught in lies, fraud, and deciet.  But just as important as his attempting to lie about the facts. The fact remains that the embossed seal on the FactCheck forgery does not contain what the State of Hawaii declared what a state issued document contains. There is no way around that. 

Here are some other Birth certificates, in every instance you can detect evidence of the embossing.

So why is the embossing defects clealy visible in other peoples COLB, but not Obama’s and more importantly nowhere on FactCheck #2?

Even the  Nordyke twins’s seal is apparent. On both of them.

Or this on from the back, where not only the seal is visible, but both date and signature stamps also. Contrast increased in seal area.

Here is the same area off the FTS COLB, note that there is no breakage or defects where the FactCheck #3 is.

Every defect, all the lettering, the fake date stamp is visible, but no where is there an indication, breakage, defect of any embossed seal.

See for yourself;

https://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/prove-it-to-yourself-so-easy-anyone-can-do-it/

https://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/prove-it-to-yourself-%e2%80%93-so-easy-anyone-can-do-it-pt-2/

https://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/12/13/prove-it-to-yourself-pt-3/

UPDATE:

Liar Lawyer who misrepresents the facts posted the following

“He also repeats his previous claim (which he pontificated on at length in his original ‘analysis’) that the COLB as posted on Kos should be considered a forgery because you can’t see any bleedthrough from the signature inkstamp. Of course, in another post he treated another COLB that similarly had no signature bleedthrough as unquestionably legitimate, which just serves to remind readers that Steve and other Birther ‘analysts’ pick and choose their evidentiary standards as they go along, without regard for consistency.”

Here is the facts and liar lawyer is smacked down again.

Here is the link to that other post: another post

The COLB that he is referring to is the following

Here are some additional images that prove that liar lawyer not only doesn’t know anything about analysis or documents and that the signature stamp that he claims is not there is not only there, but detectable, unlike the Obama ‘FORGED’ COLB that appeared on the DailyKOS and Fight the Smears that has no signature stamp and the FactCheck ‘FORGERY’ that has no embossed SEAL or signature stamp.

 

The image below with the Embossed SEAL, the Date Stamp, and the signature Stamps clearly visibe. The image was inverted to create a negitive of the original above.

The next image is the same COLB with the same inverted image [negitive] with the exposure increased to highlight the details. Note that the embossed SEAL, the Date stamp, and the signature stamp are even more detailed and pronounced.

in the third image we increase the Zero Point and even more details of the embossed SEAL, Date stamp, and signature stamp are evident.

In the forth image we ‘flip’ the image horizontally to be able to read the correct orientation. The date stamped is FEB 19 2003, the birth was on October 4, 1977, the embossed SEAL is evident and correct per the ‘State of Hawaii – Department of Health’ and the signatures stamp is evident.

Again, unlike Obama’s ‘FORGED’ COLB that has no signature stamp that was posted on the DailyKOS and Fight the Smears, and one version posted on FactCheck. This lawyer misrepresents the facts, and is again proven to be the liar that he is.

Prove it to yourself – Pt 3

In the first and second part of this series, we have looked at the forged COLB as presented and shown the irregularities between an actual one issued by the State of Hawaii and the ones presented by TheDailyKos, Fight the Smears [FTS], and FactCheck. Now for the blank template itself and the simple question. How or why would a blank ‘Certification of Live Birth’ be showing any indications of a SEAL present on it.  Here is the original Blank Hawaiian template that has been circulating on the internet. Notice that the blanked out certificate number is identical to the one posted on FTS.  The process for the issuance of a Birth Certificare or Certification of Live Birth, is that the data is printed out on via a printer, the information checked and verified and then a Seal from the issuing authority and signiture is applied. So the question remains, how does a blank certification of live birth exist with anomolies exist.  Here is a Hawaiian Blank Template with filters applied to bring out the anomolies in the area where an embossed seal is normally applied and the date stamp. Note this is also the same date that appears on the Obama COLB.  Here is the Hawaiian Blank COLB. Note that the Certificate number is blacked out and the date stamp is visible Jun 6 2007. I recieved several comments that asked me to post the Hawaiian Blank template.

Here are three different images showing the anomalies in the area that a SEAL would be applied.  All on the blank template.

Now we look at an what an Obama supporter claims as false representation on the FactCheck image.

To quote his lies; “Now a real expert, or even just a person of reasonable common sense, would chalk this up to factors like how the photo isn’t in focus, making it difficult to see a pressure seal, or how it might be obscured somewhat by the shadow. Here, for instance, is how one portion of this JPEG looks, without any modification”

The is attempting to take a portion, at the furthest point of the image and state that, ‘that area represents the entire image’. Here is another image of the FactCheck forged document.

Here is the comparison in relation to his section.

An Obot lawyer, who is too stupid and arrogant to realize that the image above, has been resized, by this blog hosting. Has decided to post a comparison image. The image below demonstrates that the FactCheck people used to verify the COLB were not only inexperienced, but were deceptive as well. They were not qualified to even photograph the document and took every effort to decieve anyone looking at it, just like the questionalbe lawyer. Regardless of the level of focus that the deranged lawyer is pawning, there are no defects from the embossing that are visible in other images. Since he can’t explain that away, he’s throwing a temper tantrum.

UPDATE 12/24/2009 As I have posted a new post today I am inserting the origional image that was to go here. Here is the one that I changed from to keep the Obot’s off-guard. The original was to have stated ‘Some degree of being in focus’ and an cropped section showing that even the date was visible.

Now even with the image above, there is no indication of anything in the area where there should be.

Now here is where is mis-representing the facts. He is openly pawning the DailyKos image as proof that there is a seal and that makes it legit. Now to destroy all myths about the Obama COLB being a legitimate State issued Certification of Live Birth.

Here is an inverted image of the DailyKos COLB. There are defects that indicate in the area [region] of where a seal should be that there are something a miss. He attempted to use ‘Edge Detection’ as a means of bringing out the edges of the breakage from the embossing. I will his own image and prove him wrong. Here is the image that he has posted ‘claiming that a seal is present.’ Note the indications of a supposed seal and date stamp with the first four images above, they are identical.

The original sixe of the DailyKos image was 2427 x 2369 – 16 million colors, over 17 megs in size.

The silver stake in the forgery that we are gong to expose is that the ‘Date Stamp’ is actually a layer superimposed on the image and is not actuall a stamp as indicated by the State of Hawaii.

Here is a crop of the image posted on the debuker’s web-site.

Notice the lines under the date stamp [here the date is reversed, as the stamp is supposed to be applied to the back of the document.]  There is no indication that any of the lines under the date stamp have been altered by the application of the stamp.  Now let’s look the same area on the Hawaiian Blank template. Also note that where there is supposed to be an ’embossed seal’ shows the same anomolies as in the Blank Hawaiian Template also.

Lets invert the DailyKos crop again and see the entire crop area.

Now for a close-up of just the ‘Date Stamp’ area

Now compare the above to the Obama COLB Date Stamp region [below] and see if you can see any line breakage from a stamp being applied to the document. Notice the ‘bleed-through’ of the date stamp being aver-layed on top of the image versus being applied to the back.

The Date Stamp was applied as a layer to the Blank Hawaiian Template and they used that image to create the Barack Obama DailyKos COLB, that image was used again on Fight the Smears ‘FTS’ website.

As even State of Hawaii’s Department of Health, Director of Communications Janice Okubo, stated “I don’t know that it’s possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents.”

The same anomolies and marking across the ‘Blank Hawaiian Template’, The DailyKos image, indicating that the same image was used to create them.  That the indications that they claim are an embossed seal and date stamp are nothing more then a layer applied to the image to make it appear that it was real.

There has been no proof that the signiture that FactCheck posted was even on the Obama COLB. Bottom line, the Blank Hawaiian template was used to create the DailyKos image and that it was never issued by the State of Hawaii. The FactCheck forgery used a non-State of Hawaii SEAL as indicated by the following e-mail.

Prove it to yourself – So easy ANYONE can do it Pt 2

In an ongoing effort to educate those about the COLB fogery. I have been holding some cards back. Now it’s time to “Cry Havoc! And slip the dogs of war”.

There are those that claim, that the COLB off “FTS’ Fight the Smears is scanned and therefore defects and other items are not going to be picked up. Or that the high resolution images off FactCheck are just as deceptive. Well lets take a look at these. First off the image off The DailyKos is (w) 2427 x (h) 2369 to compare this to the average users desktop which currently is (w) 1280 x (h) 1024 – hence this document the DailyKos posted is over two (2) times the size, the even higher resolution images off FactCheck come in at a whopping (w) 2304 x (h) 3072 or close to three (3) times the size of the standard desktop resolution, some of the FactCheck images are rotated to the side and therefore some are (w) 3072 x (h) 2304 respectfully.

There is a filter that can be applied to digital images called Statistical Image Enhancement [We will refer to this as SEI].  Which is defined as ‘The present invention relates to image enhancement by exploiting statistical properties of reference images. In particular, images may be sharpened by reconstructing missing frequency components in accordance with statistical constraints that are determined from higher order statistical properties of a reference image that corresponds to the difference of the original image and a lowpass filtered version thereof. This form of statistical image enhancement may also be applied to image and video coding in order to achieve superior image qualities at higher compression gains by transmitting statistical properties of the coding error together with the encoded images.’ 

Digital enhancement is routinely done in the field of astronomy. With the advent of CCD imaging, and software that allows even the basic amateur astronomers, to capture and enhance images caputred in with the  basic of telescopes.  Go to the Meade Telescope web-site and browse through the gallery section, or a simple google search of the same. Here is a good resource, http://www.willbell.com/aip/index.htm

Now this leads us to the images posted on the internet refered to the the previous “Prove it to yourself – So easy ANYONE can do it”  Some comments that I recieved complained that MS Paints is to basic a program, that is the point, without any special software, it is possible to detect the forgery.  Now let’s move on to further establish the forgery is self-evident.

There is a nifty freeware program called ‘Image Analyzer’. This program will be a treat for most computer users as it can manipulate pictures from the net or digital cameras. 

Now we are going to take the next stair up the forgery staircase. If you have downloaded and kept the images off the original “Prove it to yourself – So easy ANYONE can do it” you can use the same ones for this exercise. Off my blog are some additional images. Download the following images. The Decosta Birth Certificate, The Tomoyasu Birth Certificate, The Covered 1990 Certificate, The Edith Rear images.  Then after installing Image Analyzer, open the individual images and then go to the menu bar and select the ‘Operations’ – ‘Color Correction’ – ‘Statistical image enhancement…’ option, a pop-up will appear with the mathematical equation and the default entry of 0.5.  You can change this or keep it and then click on ‘OK’, at this point the process will begin and depending on the size of the image, your compter’s processing power it might be a few seconds to even a minute.

Notice that in the above images and the original ones in the previous exercise, you can clearly see the indications of the SEAL being applied to the certificates and certifications with the exceptions of FactCheck #2. WHY? Is this not supposed to be the same document as the DailyKos document (which again, HAS NO SEAL, but that was apparently scanned), or ‘FTS’ Fight the Smears (again another scanned image that has no SEAL), or the FactCheck #3 that clearly shows an embossed SEAL (but not the type defined by the State of Hawaii), so how does FactCheck #2 account for it’s existence?

Here is an original Hawaiian Certification and the SEI version;

Even this one that is NOT scanned shows evidence of the embossed SEAL.

So why doesn’t the following images show any evidence of an embossed SEAL?

FTS – Fight The Smears

The DailyKos supposed scanned imaged [resized from the original]

Or FactCheck #2

So in reality we are not talking about ONE image or document that does not contain the SEAL, we are talking about the DailyKos image that was posted in mid-June 2008 [that is a high resolution image], the FTS image posted in Aug 2008 and the FactCheck # 2 document [another high resolution] image posted after that. Now, just to be fair, here is the FactCheck #3 that does show embossing of a non-State of Hawaii issued SEAL applied. [Image resized, and area enlarged to see embossing visible]

Now I would like to remind you what the State of Hawaii has stated.

The SEAL is applied by machine and there is lettering, that lettering being “Department of Health” and “State of Hawaii”. So how does the Seal disappear and reappear and disappear off the same document?

Part 3 will also explore another aspect of digital enhancement.

“Cry Havoc! And slip the dogs of war”.

UPDATE:

Liar Lawyer who misrepresents the facts posted the following

“He also repeats his previous claim (which he pontificated on at length in his original ‘analysis’) that the COLB as posted on Kos should be considered a forgery because you can’t see any bleedthrough from the signature inkstamp. Of course, in another post he treated another COLB that similarly had no signature bleedthrough as unquestionably legitimate, which just serves to remind readers that Steve and other Birther ‘analysts’ pick and choose their evidentiary standards as they go along, without regard for consistency.”

Here is the facts and liar lawyer is smacked down again.

Here is the link to that other post: another post

The COLB that he is referring to is the following

Here are some additional images that prove that liar lawyer not only doesn’t know anything about analysis or documents and that the signature stamp that he claims is not there is not only there, but detectable, unlike the Obama ‘FORGED’ COLB that appeared on the DailyKOS and Fight the Smears that has no signature stamp and the FactCheck ‘FORGERY’ that has no embossed SEAL or signature stamp.

 

The image below with the Embossed SEAL, the Date Stamp, and the signature Stamps clearly visibe. The image was inverted to create a negitive of the original above.

The next image is the same COLB with the same inverted image [negitive] with the exposure increased to highlight the details. Note that the embossed SEAL, the Date stamp, and the signature stamp are even more detailed and pronounced.

in the third image we increase the Zero Point and even more details of the embossed SEAL, Date stamp, and signature stamp are evident.

In the forth image we ‘flip’ the image horizontally to be able to read the correct orientation. The date stamped is FEB 19 2003, the birth was on October 4, 1977, the embossed SEAL is evident and correct per the ‘State of Hawaii – Department of Health’ and the signatures stamp is evident.

Again, unlike Obama’s ‘FORGED’ COLB that has no signature stamp that was posted on the DailyKOS and Fight the Smears, and one version posted on FactCheck. This lawyer misrepresents the facts, and is again proven to be the liar that he is.

Unethical Lawyer – FBI, BAR, and Local Authorities Contacted

Is anonymous speech a right?

Yes. Anonymous speech is presumptively protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Anonymous pamphleteering played an important role for the Founding Fathers, including James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay, whose Federalist Papers were first published anonymously. And the Supreme Court has consistently backed up that tradition, ruling, for example, that an Ohio law requiring authors to put their names on campaign literature was a violation of the First Amendment. Indeed, the Supreme Court has ruled that protecting anonymous speech has the same purpose as the First Amendment itself: to “protect unpopular individuals from retaliation ­ and their ideas from suppression.”

Was Loren violating my 1st Amendment Constitutional rights when he posted his blog entry?

The U.S. Supreme Court characterized in 1995 as “an honorable tradition of advocacy and dissent.” Accordingly, Steele wrote, a court should not order the unmasking of an anonymous Internet poster unless a plaintiff offers strong proof of defamation.

“We are concerned that setting the standard too low will chill potential posters from exercising their First Amendment right to speak anonymously,” Steele wrote. “The possibility of losing anonymity in a future lawsuit could intimidate anonymous posters into self-censoring their comments or simply not commenting at all.”

DEFAMATION

A statement is defamatory if it “tends to injure the plaintiff’s reputation and expose the plaintiff to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, or degradation.” Phipps v. Clark Oil & Ref. Corp., 408 N.W.2d 569, 573 (Minn. 1987).

Anonymous Speech

First, the First Amendment protects anonymous speech. See Buckley v. Am.Constitutional Law Found., 525 U.S. 182, 200 (1999). The Supreme Court has noted that “Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.” McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Common, 514 U.S. 334, 357 (1995). Indeed, “Under our Constitution, anonymous pamphleteering is not a pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of advocacy and of dissent.”

Second, the protections of the First Amendment extend to the Internet. See Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 870 (1997). Courts also recognize that anonymity is a particularly important component of Internet speech.

“Internet anonymity facilitates the rich, diverse, and far ranging exchange of ideas [;] … the constitutional rights of Internet users, including the First Amendment right to speak anonymously, must be carefully safeguarded.” Doe v. 2 The Mart.com, Inc., 140 F.Supp.2d 1088, 1092, 1097 (W.D.Wash.2001).

Why is anonymous speech important?

There are a wide variety of reasons why people choose to speak anonymously. Many use anonymity to make criticisms that are difficult to state openly ­ to their boss, for example, or the principal of their children’s school. The Internet has become a place where persons who might otherwise be stigmatized or embarrassed can gather and share information and support ­ victims of violence, cancer patients, AIDS sufferers, child abuse and spousal abuse survivors, for example. They use newsgroups, Web sites, chat rooms, message boards, and other services to share sensitive and personal information anonymously without fear of embarassment or harm. Some police departments run phone services that allow anonymous reporting of crimes; it is only a matter of time before such services are available on the Internet. Anonymity also allows “whistleblowers” reporting on government or company abuses to bring important safety issues to light without fear of stigma or retaliation. And human rights workers and citizens of repressive regimes around the world who want to share information or just tell their stories frequently depend on staying anonymous ­ sometimes for their very lives.

Anonymous communications have an important place in our political and social discourse. The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous free speech is protected by the First Amendment. A much-cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads:

Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.

This lawyer, in an attempt to VERIFY my credentials, has accessed my personal information, which is none of his damn business and posted my identity on the internet, without my permission and fully knowing to incite vindictive action and personal bodily harm.  Therefore I will post his to expose his unethical action, in violating my 1st Amendment Constitutional Right.

Unlike myself Loren aka LorenC posts links from his blog to his web-site and biography, therefore in no way attempting to blog anonymously or protect his or his family’s identify, based on the sensitive nature of my research and material.


I have been in contact with the local authorities, the FBI, and am in the process of filing with The Georgia Bar Association.

I have also forwarded all e-mails, blog posting that reference anything relation to the unethical action by Loren Collins.  Most of the information that he has is wrong. 

INTERNET LAW – Employee Blogs Pose Potential Problems for Businesses

http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=1629

 
Georgia Bar Assoc search has the following information posted on Loren Collins
 
Mr. Loren Christopher Collins
Law Office of W Bryant Green III PC
Atlanta, GA 30308
 
Here is what Loren has to state about himself;

www.lorencollins.net

Loren has divulged  personal information without my consent or permission.

I have screenshots of his posts from other blogs that have been sent by others;  wherehe boasts about ‘oust’ing’  me.

Loern Collins is a member of the Georgia Bar Association

http://www.gabar.org/directories/member_directory_search/?formsubmit=yes&FIRST_NAME=Loren&LAST_NAME=Collins&section=&COMPANY=&lawschool=&CITY=&STATE=GA&ZIP=&submit=Search+Directory
 
 

Google has the following information on 

Loren Christopher Collins

maps.google.com

260 Peachtree Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 522-5330

Loren was a write in candidate for Independent write-in candidate campaign http://voteloren.com/ I guess this explains his ethics. He wants to part of the DC cesspool.

 In light of the current political situation, if anything happens to me or my family.  I wanted  some to be able to see where this Obot was involved.  

I have contacted the local FBI office and local authorities am forwarding any and all threats recieved to both them and the local authorities.  I  have filed a complaint with the local Police Department and have contacted his employer listed and have sent three messages, to this end. I have not hear back.  

I have also sent copies of his information and actions to the local news, both TV and paper.

I will be expanding this entry.

Updated; Additional information and references added. Layout changed and text revised.

Prove it to yourself – So easy ANYONE can do it

So easy ANYONE can do it

For over 15 months I have been stating that the Obama COLB posted on Fight the Smears and FactCheck are forgeries. The Obama supporters have attempted to ridicule and misrepresent the facts, of those who question the validity of a single document, the Certification of Live Birth posted on Fight the Smears and FactCheck.

Here lies the challenge to everyone that wants to see for themselves, by their own hand evidence of document forgery.

Here are the files that you will need, please note that these image are HIGH Resolution images with the exception of the FTS one, all the others are large images.

 COLB #2 without SEAL

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_3.jpg

size 2304 x 3072

Date Signature

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_9.jpg

size 3072 x 2304

 Raised seal

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_1.jpg

size 2304 x 3072

Veritcal #3 with SEAL

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg

2304 x 3072

 COLB #3 in its side

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_2.jpg

size 3072 x 2304

 FTS

http://www.fightthesmears.com/images/28.jpg

size 585 x 575

DailyKos

http://palabre.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/bo_birth_certificate-kos.jpg

size 2427 x 2369

All you need to do is the following;

  1. Download the files and save to your hard drive.
  2. Browse to the folder that you saved the files to.
  3. Right click on the file and in the menu select ‘Open with’ and choose ‘Paint’
  4. This will open the selected file in Microsoft Paint.
  5. You don’t have to resize the image, as it would be better if you viewed if  full size.
  6. With the image opened, you have 2 options. Go to the Menu bar and select ‘Image’ and then ‘Invert colors’ or use the Ctrl + I keys.
  7. Save that file as xxxxInv, where xxx is the original file name and INV stands for Inverted.
  8. Now compare the images.
  9. Note the following;
  10. 28.jpg has no SEAL applied to it
  11. birth_certificate_1.jpg shows CLEAR indications of an embossed SEAL.
  12. birth_certificate_2.jpg shows CLEAR indications of an embossed SEAL.
  13. birth_certificate_3.jpg shows NO indications of an any line breakage and paper perforation by anything let alone an embossed SEAL.
  14. birth_certificate_5.jpg shows CLEAR indications of an embossed SEAL.
  15. birth_certificate_9.jpg is the
  16. bo_birth_certificate-kos.jpg shows NO indications of an any line breakage and paper perforation by anything let alone an embossed SEAL.

There you have your evidence, three different COLB posted. Using only your operating system, and a very simple graphics program with nothing else you have been able see with your own eyes the evidence of document forgery. Without having to adjust the brightness or contrast, hue and saturation, you can plainly see the evidence. How can indentations and perforations be clearly seen on one image and totally absent the next?

John Adams on Natural Born Citizens and Subjects

Here are some letters from John Adams concerning Natural Born Citizens and Subjects, including Natural Born Subjects.

John Adams

Dear Sir. Grosvenor Square July 24th. 1785—

I have a Letter from the Baron De Thulemeier of the 19th, and a Copy of his Letter to you of the same date. I hope now in a few Day’s to take Mr. Short by the hand in Grosvenor Square, and to put my hand to the [Tr]eaty. I think no time should be lost. We will join Mr. Dumas with Mr. Short in the Exchange if you please.

I applyed as you desire, and obtained the interposition of the Lords Commissioners of the treasury, and the Commissioners of the Customs for the transhipping of Dr. Franklin’s Baggage. We have heared of the Doctors arrival at Rouen, but no further.

— 994./ 130./ 301.1071. 160. 7 /1353./ 1333./ 925./ 1542./ 1178. 787. 793./ 1105./ 1537./ 340./ 195./ 583./ 330./ 542. 1307./ 162./ 1437./ 1145./ 565. 611. 244.1021./ 1297. 8./ 56. 712. 1024./ 1537./ 34./ 726./ 1105. 7./ 162./ 340./ 991./ 411./ 1145./ 425./ — — 565./ 519. 543. 277. 320./ 1213./ 436./ 527. 1291./ 240./ 1281. 1471. 518. 346. 598./ 994./ 525.7./ 297. 301./ 1162. 821./ 266. 7./ 240./ 994./ 69./ 1537./ 297. 301./ 1162. 821./ 1281. 186. 7./ 240./ 57./ 556. 998./ 240./ 994./ 1453./ 847. 1205./ 985./ 1154./ 780. 207. 1082./ 406./ 458./ 41. 747./ 565./ 413./ 1213./ 565./ 301. [152./] 985. 7./ 215./ 1145./ 677./ 213. 1122./ 1409./ 994./ 362./ 1103./ 179./ 676./ 636.7./ 506./ 292./ 206. 8. 1205. 1189./ 292./ 1290./ 1133./ 565./ 925. 694./ 247. 476. 1267. 7./ 240./ 330./ 65./ 1575. 1122./ 565./ 330./ 704./ 676./ 1072./ 406./ 301. 238. 1205./ 330./ 565./ 994./ 776. 1122./ 240./ 110. 821. 346. 7/ 114. 158. 7. 957. 8./ 215./ 7042.1042/ 994./ 362./ 1059./ 411./ 1575./ 565./ 330./ 406./ 562. 250./ 1319. 1190./ 559. 476. 1267. 7./ 365./ 951./ 1381. 436. 1449./ 1353. 7./ 1537./ 1199./ 1558. 250./ 2./ 616./ 446. 1492/ 330./ 1333./ 815./ 994./ 506./ 1290./ 1097./ 1537./ 933. 692. 1466. 925./ 1053./ 240./ 700./ 995./ 994./ 513. 1129. 633./ 215. /162./ 340./ 943. 1548./ 556./ 459. 895. 821./ 301. 1551./ 692. / 994 / 737./ 513. 1129. 633. /209./ 784./ 994./ 1351./ — 818./ 261./ 1579./ 1042./ 716./ 21./ 1086.7./ 565./ 1154. / —

There is a Bill before Parliament to prevent smuggling Tobacco, in which restrictions are very rigorous, but cannot be effected. two thirds of the Tobacco consumed in this Kingdom I am told is smuggled—how can it be otherwise when the impost is five times the original Value of the Commodity. If a pound in five escapes nothing is lost. if two in five, a great profit is made.

The Duty is 16d. pr. pound and tobacco sells for three pence. —Yet all applications for lowering the Duty are rejected— —

Yours most affectionately

John Adams

Thomas Jefferson’s Deciphered Version

the British alliense duty is a very burthensome thing and they may carry it hereafter as far upon tobacco rice indies & twenty other things as they do now upon oil. to obviate this I think of substituting the words natural born citizens of the U.S.and natural born subjects of G.B. in stead of the most favored nation you remember we first proposed to offer this to all nations, but upon my objecting that the English would make their ships French or sweadote or Dutch Etc. to avail themselves of it without agreeing to it on their part we alltered it to the foot ing of gentis amicissimi. but if the English will now agree to it we shall secure ourselves against many odious duties and no ill consequence can arise. it is time the French Dutch Sweden and Prussia will of course claim the advantage but as they must inreturn allow us the same advantage so much the better. let me know if any objection occurs to you

 

 

 

 

John Adams to John Jay

25 Aug. 1785

Dear Sir Grosvenor Square Westminster August 25. 1785

Yesterday, I had a long Conference with Mr Pitt for the first time. He never had proposed any Interview with me, and I had delayed to request him to appoint any Time, after the first ceremonial Visit, for two Reasons; because that while Parliament was Sitting his Time and Mind were so engaged that it was impossible he Should attend in earnest to the Affairs of the United States, and because I expected that a little Time would bring, both from America and Ireland, Intelligence which would Somewhat lessen that Confidence with which the Ministry and the Nation were elated. Such Intelligence has now arrived: The twenty Resolutions have been, in Effect, given up that they might not be rejected by the Irish Parliament: and the Massachusetts Act of Navigation has appeared, together with Advices from Virginia, Philadelphia New York and various other Parts of the United States, which have excited a Serious Apprehension that all have the same Principles and Views.

I Shall not attempt to give you the Conversation in detail, Yet it is necessary to give Some Particulars, from which you may judge, how much or how little may result from the whole[.]

He asked me what were the Principal Points to be discussed between Us? I answered that I presumed the Marquis of Carmarthen had laid before the Kings Servants Some Papers which I had done myself the Honour to write to him. He said he had. I replied that those Letters related to the Evacuation of the Posts upon the Frontier: to the Construction of the Armistice: and to a Treaty of Commerce: and that besides these, there were the Negroes carried off contrary to the Treaty, and Some other Points which I had particularly explained to Lord Carmarthen. He Said that the carrying off the Negroes was So clearly against the Treaty, that they must take Measures to Satisfy that demand if We could prove how many were carryed off. I told him that Sir Guy Carleton could easily ascertain the Number, and that Coll Smith, who negotiated with Sir Guy, could do the Same, And that I had the Evidence of their Proceedings ready to produce whenever it was wanted. He entered then into the Subject of the Armistice, and We were longer upon this Point than We need to have been. I observed to him that Mr Blowers’s Construction was demonstrably absurd, because it would place the whole Coast of America in the Period of five Months: the Coast of the United States certainly was not between the Canary Islands and the Equator, and therefore could not be included in the Period of two Months: it is neither in the Channell nor North Seas; and therefore cannot be within the Period of twelve Days: consequently if it is not in the Period of one Month, it must be in that of five Months.—an Idea that never could have been entertained a Moment by either of the contracting Parties. Mr Pitt Said he thought that was clear, and that this Point might be easily Settled: but as to the Posts, Says he, that is a Point connected with Some others that I think must be Settled at the same Time. I asked what those Points were? He said the Debts. Several of the States had interfered, against the Treaty, and by Acts of their Legislatures had interposed Impediments to the Recovery of Debts, against which there were great Complaints in this Country. I replied to this, that I had explained this at great length to the Marquis of Carmarthen; but that I might now Add, that Congress had, very early after the Peace, proposed an Explanation of the Article, as far as it respected the Interest of Debts contracted before the War. They had instructed their Ministers at Paris to propose Such an Explanation to this Court. That We had proposed it, through Mr Hartley first and the Duke of Dorsett afterwards; and that I had renewed the Proposition to my Lord Carmarthen, upon my first Conference with him: but that We had never received any Answer. I thought it was best there Should be an Explanation; for I was perswaded th[at] an American Jury would never give any Interest for the Time which run during the War. Mr Pitt Said that would Surprize People here; for that Wars never interrupted the Interest nor Principal of Debts, and that he did not See a Difference between this War and any other and the Lawyers here made none. I begged his Pardon here, and Said that the American Lawyers made a Wide Diff[er]ence. They contended that the late War was a total Dissolution of all Laws and Government, and consequently of all Contracts made under those Laws. And that it was a Maxim of Laws that a Personal Right or Obligation, on[ce] dissolved or Suspended, was lost forever: that the Interven[tion] of the Treaty, and the new Laws was necessary for the Revival of those ancient Rights and Obligations. That these Rights we[re] in a State of Non Existence during the War, and no Interest during that Period could grow out of them. These being the opinions in America, it was not probable that any Jury would be found from Georgia to New Hampshi[re] who would give, by their Verdict, Interest to a Creditor, and therefore it was most fair and equitable, that an Explanation Should be made, that the Same Rule of Law might be observed on both Sides. This Observation appeared to Strike him. He Said if there was any danger of this, it would be best that an Explanation Should be made; but th[at] [t]he Ballance of Debts was much in favour of this Country; which I did not deny. But he said the Government would not dare to make it, without previously feeling out the Dispositions of the Persons chiefly interested, and knowing how it would be taken by them. We had a much longer Conversation concerning these Debts and the Difficulty of paying them arising from the Restrictions on our Trade; in which I repeated to him what I had before Said to Lord Carmarthen, and to the Deputies of the Scotch Creditors; but as I have transmitted all that to you before it is unnecessary to repeat it here.

He then began upon the Treaty of Commerce; and asked what was the lowest Terms which would be Satisfactory to America. I answered, that I might not think myself competent to determine that Question. Articles might be proposed to me that I Should not think myself qualified to decide upon, without Writing to Congress. But I would venture so far as to Say, that I thought the Project I had communicated to Lord Carmarthen would give Satisfaction to America, and Secure the Friendship of the United States and the Essence of their Trade to this Country. But that in Proportion as a Plan less liberal was adopted that Friendship would be precarious and that Trade would be Scattered. I added, that the most Judicious Men in America had been long ballancing in their Minds the Advantages and Dissadvantages of a Commerce perfectly free, on one Side, and.of a Navigation Act on the other: that the present time was a critical one: the late Intelligence from all Parts of America concurred, with the Navigation Act of the Massachusetts, in proving which Way the Ballance began to incline; and in my Opinion it would be decided by the conduct of this Country: it was now in his Mr Pitts, Power to decide it. But the more Americans reflected upon the great Advantages which they might derive from a Navigation Act, the more they would become attached to that System. I had heard there were five hundred foreign Ships employed the last Year in the Commerce of the United States: how easy would it be to have all these Ships the Property of American Citizens? and the Navigators of them American Seamen? There was once a Statute in England (that of 5. Ric.2.c.3.) “that none of the Kings liege People Should Ship any Merchandize out of or into the Realm but only in Ships of the Kings ligeance, on pain of Forfeiture.” I asked him what Physical or political Impediment there was to prevent the United States from adopting that very Act, in all its rigour. The Right of every Nation to govern its own Commerce, its own Exports and Imports, would not be denied, nor questioned by any Nation. This he agreed. our Ability to build the Ships and our Abundance of Materials could not be doubted. This he assented to. No Body would pretend that our Produce would not find a Markett in Europe, in our own Ships, or that Europeans would not Sell Us their Manufactures to carry home in them. Even England, if She Should make ever so strict Laws to prevent Exports and Imports in our Bottoms, would still be glad to receive and consume Considerable Quantities of our Produce, tho’ she imported them through France or Holland; and to send Us as many of her Manufactures as We could pay for, through the same channells. He more than Smiled assent to this; for he added that there were American Articles of much Importance to them. But he said that Englishmen were much attached to their Navigation. and Americans too, says I, to theirs. But, Says he, the United States, having now become a foreign Nation, our Navigation Act would not answer its End, if We Should dispense with it towards Y[ou.] Here I begged his Pardon again; for I thought their Navigation Act would compleatly defeat its own End, as far as it respected Us; for the End of the Navigation Act, as expressed in its own Preamble, was to confine the Commerce of the Colonies to the Mother Country: but now We were become independent States, if carried into Execution against Us, instead of confining our Trade to Great Britain, it would drive it to other Countries. This he did not deny[.] But Says he you allow We have a Right. Certainly I do; and You […] will allow We have a Right too. Yes I do; But you cannot blame Englishmen for being attached to their Ships and Seamen, which are So essential to them. Indeed I do not, Sir, nor can you blame Americans for being attached to theirs, which are so much fewer and so much more essential to them.—No, I dont blame them. As this w[as] a very Sprightly Dialogue and in very good Humour, I thought I might push it a little. I will be very frank with you sir Says I, and and I think it will be best for Us to go to the Bottom of these subjects. The Americans think that their Exclusion from Your West India Islands, the Refusal of their Ships and Oyl and other Things, a[nd] their Exclusion from your Colonies on the Continent & Newfound[land,] discovers a Jealousy of their little naval Power and a fixed Sy[mbol] of Policy to prevent the Grouth of it; and this is an Idea that they cannot bear. No, Says he. If We endeavoured to lessen your Shipping and Seamen, without benefiting or increasing our own, it would be hard and unreasonable, and would be a just ground of Uneasiness. But, When We only aim at making the most of our own means and Nurseries, you cannot justly complain. I am happy Sir to hear you avow this Principle, and agree with you perfectly in it.—let Us apply it.—both Parties having the Right and the Power to confine their Exports and Imports to their own Ships and Seamen, if both exercise the Right and Exert the Power in its full Extent, what is the Effect? The commerce must cease between them. Is this eligible for either? To be sure, Says he, We should well consider the Advantages and the Disadvantages in Such a Case. if it is not found to be eligible for either, Says I, after having well considered, what remains but that We Should agree upon a liberal Plan and allow equal freedom to each others Ships and Seamen; especially if it Should be found that this alone can preserve Friendship and good Humour, for I fully believe that this Plan alone can ever put this Nation in good Humour with America, or America with this Country. He then mentioned Ships and Oil. He said We could not think hard of them for encouraging their own Shipwrights, their Manufactures of Ships, and their own Whale Fishery. I answered, by no means; but it appeared unaccountable to the People of America, that this Country Should Sacrifice the general Interest of the Nation to the private Interest of a few Individuals, interested in the Manufacture of Ships and in the whale Fishery; so far as to refuse these Remittances from America, in Payment of Debts, and in Payment for Manufactures; which would employ so many more People, augment the Revenue so considerably, as well as the national Wealth, which would even, in others Ways, So much augment the Shipping and Seamen of the Nation. it was looked upon in America as Reconciling themselves to a diminution of their own Shipping and Seamen, in a great degree, for the Sake of diminishing ours in a Small one; besides keeping many of their Manufacturers out of Employ, who would other wise have enough to do, and besides, greatly diminishing the Revenue, and consequently contrary to the Maxims which he had just acknowledged, that one Nation should not hurt itself, for the sake of hurting another, nor take Measures to deprive another of any Advantage, without benefiting itself.

He then asked if We could grant to England by a Treaty any Advantages which would not immediately become the Right of France? I answered We could not. if the Advantage was Stipulated to England without a Compensation, France would be entituled to it without Compensation: But if it was Stipulated: for an Equivalent or reciprocal Priviledge, France must allow Us the Same Equivalent or reciprocal Priviledge. But, I added, France would not be a very Successfull Rival to Britain in the American Commerce, upon So free a Footing as that of the mutual Liberty of natural born Subjects and Citizens: upon the footing of the most favoured Nation, France would Stand a good Chance in many Things. in Case of mutual Navigation Acts, between Britain and America, France would have more of our Commerce than Britain. in Short Britain would loose and France gain; not only in our Commerce, but our Affections, in proportion as Britain departed from the most liberal System. Upon this He asked a Question which I did not expect.—What do you really think, Sir, that Britain ought to do.? That Question, Sir, may be beyond my Capacity to answer, and my Answer may be Suspected, but, if it is, I will answer it to the best of my Judgment and with perfect Sincerity. I think this Country ought to prescribe to herself no other Rule, but to take from America every Thing She can Send as a Remittance; nay, to take off every Duty, and give every Bounty, that Should be necessary to enable them to Send any Thing as a Remittance.—in this Case, America would prescribe to herself no other Rule than to take of British Productions as much as She could pay for. He might think this no Proof of our Republican Frugality; but Such was the Disposition of our People, and, how much soever I might lament it, I would not disguise it.—He then led me into a long rambling Conversation about our Whale Fishery, and the English Whale Fishery; and the French Whale Fishery that Mr De Calonne is essaying to introduce, too little interresting to be repeated. Yet I should mention, that he asked me a Sudden Question, whether We had taken any Measures to find a Markett for our Oil any wher[e] but in France.—This Question must have been Suggested to him I think, either by Information that our Oil is wanted in some Countries upon the Continent, or by a Suspicion that We have been trying to introduce our Oil into Ireland. I answere[d] that I believed We had, and I had been told that some of our Oil had found a good Markett at Bremen; but there could not be a doubt that Spermaceti Oyl might find a Marke[t] in most of the great Cities of Europe, which were illuminated in the Night, as it is so much better and cheaper than the Vegitab[le] Oil that is commonly used. The Fat of the Spermaceti Whale gives the clearest and most beautifull Flame, of any Substa[nce] that is known in Nature, and We are all Surprized, that you prefer Darkness, and consequent Robberies, Burglaries and Murders in your Streets to the Receiving as a Remittance our Sperma Caeti Oyl. The Lamps around Grosvenor Square I know and in Downing Street I suppose are dim by Midnight, and extinguished by two o clock; whereas our Oyl would burn bright till Nine O Clock in the Morning, and chase away before the Watchmen all the Villains, and save you the Trouble and Danger of introducing a new Police into the City.—

He said He owned he was for taking Advantage of the present Short time of Leisure to mature Some Plan about these Things. I told him I rejoiced to find that was his opinion and that I would be at all times ready to attend him or any other Minister, whenever any Explanation should be wanted from me: that I was anxious for an Answer concerning the Posts, as I was in duty bound to insist on their Evacuation. He Said He thought that connected with Several other Points, and Should be for Settling all these together, So that he must reserve himself at entire Liberty concerning them.

I am Sorry that, in representing all these Conversations, I am obliged to make myself the principal Speaker. But I cannot get them to talk. The Reason is they dare not. all must be determined in the Cabinet, and no Single Minister chooses to commit himself, by giving any opinion, which may be ever quoted to his Disadvantage by any Party. This is not only the State of Mind of every Minister, but of every Ministry. They have an unconquerable Reluctance to deciding upon any Thing, or giving any Answer: and although Mr Pitt and Lord Carmarthen have hazarded opinions upon some Points to me, I dont believe I Shall get any Answer, officially, from the Cabinet or the Minister of foreign Affairs. I wish for an Answer, be it ever so rough or unwise. Mr Pitt I confess was much more open than I expected. He was explicit in my favour, relative to the Negroes, the Armistice, and for digesting the whole in the present Leisure, and giving me an Answer. I should rejoice in a Cabinet Answer to all my Letters, and especially in a Counter Project of a Treaty. But I will be so free to Say I dont expect any Answer at all before next Spring; nor then unless Intelligence Should arrive of all the States adopting a Navigation Act or authorizing Congress to do it; and even in that Case I am inclined to think they will try the Experiment and let our Navigation Acts operate, to Satisfy themselves which People will first roar out with Pain. They deceive themselves Yet in Many Points, which I may enumerate in a future Letter.

From what Mr Pitt Said I am convinced We shall have no Answer concerning the Posts.

With great Respect and Sincere Esteem / I have the Honour to be, sir, your most / obedient and most humble servant

John Adams.

 Thomas Jefferson to John Adams

7 Feb. 1786

Dear Sir Paris Feb. 7. 1786

I am honored with yours of Jan. 19. mine of Jan. 12. had not I suppose at that time got to your hands as the receipt of it is unacknoleged. I shall be anxious till I receive your answer to it.

I was perfectly satisfied, before I received your letter, that your opinion had been  misunderstood or misrepresented in the case of the Chevalier de Mezieres. your letter however will enable me to say so with authority. it is proper it should be known that you had not given the opinion imputed to you, tho’ as to the main question it is become useless, Monsieur de Reyneval having assured me that what I had written on that subject had perfectly satisfied the Ct. de Vergennes & himself that this case could never come under the treaty. to evince still further the impropriety of taking up subjects gravely on such imperfect information as this court had, I have this moment received a copy of an act of the Georgia assembly placing the subjects of France as to real estates on the footing of natural citizens & expressly recognizing the treaty. would you think any thing could be added after this to put this question still further out of doors? a gentleman of Georgia assures me General Oglethorpe did not own a foot of land in the state—I do not know whether there has been any American determination on the question whether American citizens & British subjects born before the revolution can be aliens to one another? I know there is an opinion of Ld Coke’s in Calvin’s case that if England & Scotland should in a course of descent pass to separate kings, those born under the same sovereign during the union would remain natural subjects & not aliens. common sense urges strong considerations against this. e. g. natural subjects owe allegiance. but we owe none.—aliens are the subjects of a foreign power we are subjects of a foreign power.—the king by the treaty acknoleges our independance; how then can we remain natural subjects.—the king’s power is by the constitution competent to the making peace, war & treaties. he had therefore authority to relinquish our allegiance by treaty.—but if an act of parliament had been necessary, the parliament passed an act to confirm the treaty. &c &c. so that it appears to me that in this question fictions of law alone are opposed to sound sense.

I am in hopes Congress will send a minister to Lisbon. I know no country with which we are likely to cultivate a more useful commerce. I have pressed this in my private letters.

It is difficult to learn any thing certain here about the French & English treaty. yet, in general, little is expected to be done between them. I am glad to hear that the Delegates of Virginia had made the vote relative to English commerce, tho they afterwards repealed it. I hope they will come to again. when my last letters came away they were engaged in passing the revisal of their laws, with some small alterations. the bearer of this, mr[expansion sign] Lyons, is a sensible worthy young physician, son of one of our Judges, and on his return to Virginia, remember me with affection to mrs[expansion sign] & miss Adams, Colos. Smith & Humphreys and be assured of the esteem with which I am Dr. Sir / Your friend & servant

Th:Jefferson

 Michael DeGray to James Madison

17 Jul. 1825

Sir City of New York: Division Street, No. 198. July 17th. 1825.

We hope you will excuse the freedom of strangers addressing a citizen of the first reputation and whose political merit stands high Excepting with the british party in the united States.

The intention of writing to you was suggested to us by pure love of country or our attachment to a representative government. Therefore it is our belief that you was chosen chief Magistrate of a Federal nation at a time the most critical since the declaration of Independence no man could have had a more difficult task to perform but we conceive that measures must have been conducted Judiciously, or the opposition would have been calculated to frustrate its happy termination at last, but which was effected during your official duties notwithstanding.

But your Successor in office has performed his part in a more singular manner than any President of which you must be very Sensible Here we think he has cultivated a misterious friendship with the british government the great extent of which we are at a loss exactly to comprehend, because with a view to insure its operation a coalition of the parties in one body was deemed necessary however mischievous in its effects confounding the whole under the indefinite term of peoples Men, or party whose design was to abanden the old mode of nominating candidats for offices producing a compleat indecision in the Electoral colleges. Consequently carrying the choice of the chief Magistrate to the hause of Representatives this being the only alternative or provision. It may be considered the death of representation, or its final termination or the pivot where Aristocracy begins. His theory being that parties are unnecessary in our government. See his letter to General Jackson.

Under this administration all true influential characters who defended the Elective representative institutions of the social order are distroyed in their reputation and popularity however honest, or costly it proved to obtain they obtained them you alone sir, have Escaped the general wreck or ruin attendent on adherence to truth or Justice. We have at present no other to address consult or look to. We have lost our solomons and Sampsins. Their hair are all cut and become weak like other men. Yet besides all this there is one trait in James Monroes official performances, that requires special notice nearly at the close of the last term of his office he sends a Presidential invitation to Lay Fayette, to visit the United States on which account he is denominated the Nations guest, of which the british party has made a most tremendous use clothing him with the most Extravagant Panegyricks in every part of the Union which no modest true democratic Republican could condesend to receive

All this parade and flattery, is predicated upon his revolutionary Services upon which we observe that the revolution presented a suitable Theatre, that suited the ardour and ambition of Youth more especially upon condition of receiving a <Major> Generals commission for Military experience.

Notwithstanding it appears that he has heretofore receved Such remunerations as other officers received, which is all that Justice required to be done. Yet he was made the most important article in the Presidents Message and although he made no legal claim yet, by a process of Legislation he recieves a very large and liberal gift from the nations purse. Let us ask you the reason why it is that our national purse is so easily approached by one of the princes of the blood, and all the whole Scene attended with general Ecclat and noise, when a natural born citizen shall exhaust all his resources at a more more recent period as a liberal Benefactor in his countries cause from pure principal and love of country shall be refused even what is Justly due him. Were is that Magnanimity of his country that he was referred to while she was in danger. Alass it flew as quick as that danger disappeared, and instead of any national gift, or satisfaction for legal claims he was calumniated in the most vilest manner in all parts of the Union. by or with means devoid of all foundation Such is the picture of the Still born administration of James Monroe, He himself ceartainly knew the Merits of the Man. Had he taken half the pains to do Justice to Daniel D. Tompkins as he has done to rewards Lay Fayette unnecessarily he might have been our Republican champion still, and instead of his present repose in the grave enjoying the sweets of domestic life with the rest of his cotemporary citizens and in fine it would have prevented that painfull arrangement of suffering his name to be recorded on the list of public Defaulters and read before his face in the Senate.

This example Shews plainly that this rewarding donation to Lay Fayette is a political contrivance and doth not flow from principal It possibly may be as the british party in the united states covered corruption and intrigue under the Name of Washington so likewise under the Name of Lay Fayette, they may try to perform this Same But we rather consider him in his private Sentiment in favour of a limitted Monarchy which constitutes the ultimate object of the british party in the united States.

Uppon the whole, we conclude, that the present Lay Fayette Eulogy, presents the vilest insult to all the true patriots of the late war. That very party that was most vehement in his praise acted in opposition to the late war and styled themselves the peace party This party did all in their power to bring your administration into total ruin and disgrace How absurd then is it to think that they shall have it in their power to brag among themselves how easely they can decieve and flatter the poor silly democrats. Shall it ever be said that Lay Fayette deserved as Much or more praise and rewards than the champions that stood firm during the late war. What an insult to the feelings of those that took a patriotic part, in repulsing the inveterate foe from our dear bought rights. Shall it ever be that the british party shall reign triumphant, and Yoke us again under the power of Aristocracy,

To conclude, we ask you Sir, Can you receive the visit of this European Sycophant, which will come clothed with all hypocracy of the british party whose main designs is to distroy republican Governments in general and that of the United States in particular. How consious how mistrustfull how Jealous should the partisins for a Republic to be when they have the General cuning of Royalty cooperating among them taking every shape for deception.

This letter sir you can answer or not, as you may think proper: but this Much we will assure you that if you should, it shall never find its way at this day, in any public print, we shall not all sign our Names, at present we wish to act still and quiet, not in public Jornals at present but by private letters

Michael DeGray

RC (DLC). Docketed by JM.