America: The Curious Case of Jerome Daly

homeless_newsThe one reoccurring theme for the American public in the current recession, besides how much the taxpayer is going to be on the hoop in regards to the automotive industry, has been foreclosure after foreclosure by banks to create a new sub-sect of the American public that are homeless. A sect that not because of addiction, mental illness or lack of self determination, but because of economic factors outside their control, now resides on the side roads wondering what will become of them when the promise of recovery occurs. It is far more prominent in the United States but there are some similar occurrences in its northern neighbour of Canada. Government officials will do their fifteen second sound bite on ‘how terrible it is’ and how ‘it is regrettable that this occurred; if only there was something that could have been done to prevent this tragedy from happening’, then move on to how important the clean air admissions bill will be for the good of the future. But what if those officials aren’t wholly being truthful?

The place was Minnesota, the year 1968, and homeowner Jerome Daly was facing foreclosure from the First National Bank of Minnesota. Instead of gathering up all the possessions that he could carry and leave the house that he had called his home, he took the bank to court. The basis of Mr. Daly’s argument was that the mortgage contract was null and void because while he had been earnest in the acquisition of his property, the bank had not been.

In contracts, there is a term that people should be aware of; “Consideration”. In the legal arena, consideration is something of value that each party puts up as recognition of their part of the agreement between the two parties. In mortgages, the people applying for the houses, apartments, land, what have you, put up what they are trying to attempt to acquire as their part of the agreement. For the part, the bank or other fiscal institution the person is dealing with puts up the money needed to cover that acquisition with the expectation of getting that principle, plus the interest rate that is attached to it. What this means is that the fiscal institution creates an account with that amount of dollars in it. The key word is creates; the institution does not sell off any of its assets to cover the expenses that it is giving out to the person looking to acquire the property in question. How did this help Jerome Daly? In simple terms, the bank admitted that they created the credit that was used in exchange for Daly’s home – they did not give up any pre-existing line of credit or asset in order to meet the contract with Daly. The judge, in rendering his verdict, wrote, “The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan (the bank’s president) admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this.”, and added “Only God can create something from nothing”. Jerome Daly was able to keep his home.

In an ideal world, this would be a case of precedent for those who would follow and attempt the same thing in order to keep their homes, but it is not an ideal world. Since this case, there have been several attempts at procuring the same result which have ended in failure. Why? As one judge explained in his verdict against a homeowner, “I’m not prepared to open the door to the destruction of the banking institutions”. Foreclosures do not only create profit for fiscal institutions, they also are a boon to the legal system. How many fees and charges are paid to lawyers, solicitors and the like as the foreclosure process rumbles over those who are its victims? Provincial, State and especially Federal governments in Canada and the United States also profit from having the legal system protecting the outright attack on fiscal institutions. Individuals do not have the resources to outlast the assaults of legal, governmental and fiscal volleys thrown at them for any extended amount of time; if they did they wouldn’t have been in a foreclosure situation to begin with. With that, the status quo continues unabated.

Perhaps its time for those who have the fiscal boot pushing them on the back to reach over and grab the boot that holds his societal brother or sister down in the submissive position and snap the ankle bone. Where an individual fails maybe a unified group could force change. To simply file suit after suit against fiscal institutions would be a waste of effort. What needs to occur is for the people to force federal, provincial and state governments to ‘come on board’ with the wishes of the people whose best interests they are supposed to be serving. How can families living in a tent or a car or under a box be considered a worthwhile end?

What is the worse thing that can happen if the general public began to scrutinize and understand the legalese induced confusion of fiscal institutions? One possible result could be governments, the law system and fiscal institutions could rally together and solidify their phantom solidarity, which would result in the unmasking of the propaganda of these systems as not being for the people but for themselves. A second result could be the implosion of the banking system which perhaps may cause bloody conflicts or a new negotiated fairer system. Whatever the case may be it has to be better than what the current situation is – slavery of the masses to a system built on the premise that from the day one is born to the day they die they will always be in debt.

It is also interesting to note, that the same protocols the banks use as “considerations” are also embedded into credit card contracts. Perhaps it is time for not only Americans and Canadians to start reading the fine print of contracts with fiscal institutions. Since originality is not the calling card of the banking community world wide, other peoples in other nations should peer into that dark world as well.

About karlsie

Some great perversity of nature decided to give me a tune completely out of keeping with the general symphony; possibly from the moment of conception. I learned to read and speak almost simultaneously. The blurred and muffled world I heard through my first five years of random nerve loss deafness suddenly came alive with the clarity of how those words sounded on paper. I had been liberated for communications. I decided there was nothing more wonderful than writing. It was easier to write than carefully modulate my speech for correct pronunciation, and it was easier to read than patiently follow the movements of people’s lips to learn what they were saying. It was during that dawning time period, while I slowly made the connection that there weren’t that many other people who heard the way I did, halfway between sound and music, half in deafness, that I began to understand that the tune I was following wasn’t quite the same as that of my classmates. I was just a little different. General education taught me not only was I just a little isolated from my classmates, my home was just a little isolated from the outside world. I was born in Alaska, making me part of one of the smallest, quietest minorities on earth. I decided I could live with this. What I couldn’t live with was discovering a few years later, in the opening up of the pipeline, which coincided with my first year of junior college, that there were entire communities of people; more than I could possibly imagine; living impossibly one on top of another in vast cities. It wasn’t even the magnitude of this vision that inspired me so much as the visitors who came from these populous regions and seemed to possess a knowledge so great and secretive I could never learn it in any book. I became at once, very conscious of how rural I was and how little I knew beyond the scope of my environment. I decided it was time to travel. The rest is history; or at least, the content of my stories. I traveled... often to college campuses, dropping in and out of school until one fine day by chance I’d fashioned a bachelor of arts degree in psychology. I’ve worked a couple of newspapers, had a few poems and stories tossed around in various small presses, never receiving a great deal of money, which I’m assured is the norm for a writer. I spent ten years in Mexico, watching the peso crash. There is some obscure reason why I did this, tightening up my belt and facing hunger, but I believe at the time I said it was for love. Here I am, back home, in my beloved Alaska. I’ve learned somewhat of a worldly viewpoint; at least I like to flatter myself that way. I’ve also learned my rural roots aren’t so bad after all. I work in a small, country store. Every day I greet the same group of local customers, but make no mistake. My store isn’t a scene out of Andy Griffith. The people who enter the establishment, which also includes showers, laundry and movie rentals, are miners, oil workers, truck drivers, construction engineers, dog sled racers and carpenters. Sometimes, on the liquor side, the conversations became adult only in vocabulary. It’s a good thing, on the opposite side of the store is a candy aisle filled with the most astonishing collection, it will keep a kid occupied with just wishing for hours. If you tell your kids they can have just one, you have an instant baby sitter; better than television; as they agonize over their choice while you catch up on the gossip with your neighbor. We also receive a lot of tourists, a lot of foreign visitors. They are usually amazed at this first sign of Alaskan rural life style beyond the insulating hub of the Anchorage bowl. Many of them like to hang around and chat. They gawk at our thieves wanted posters. They laugh at our jokes and camaraderie with our customers. I’ve learned another lesson while working there. You don’t have to go out and find the world. If you wait long enough, it comes to you.

View all posts by karlsie →

9 Comments on “America: The Curious Case of Jerome Daly”

  1. Perhaps the investors of the now sunk Countrywide Mortgage company have learned a thing or two from Mr. Daly. This past week they are sueing Countrywide for not fully disclosing to them the risk to their investments. The lawyers aught to open that suit up to anyone who had a mortgage with that company. Perhaps if they did a few more people would still be in their homes. Thanks for the article. Nice work.

  2. The problem I see with getting a group of people together to support one another is this supposed homelessness. Most people who are currently losing their homes and who have lost their homes in the last 5 years are people who can afford homes. They simply couldn’t afford what they had been given credit for. They overreached themselves. That is not to say I don’t feel they have been taken advantage of…but please show me these masses of homeless people. Most people who have been dispossesed of their homes are now renting and paying off someone else’s mortgage. They never lost thier income and are not wont to get behind a big movement when keeping thier family fed clothed and in thier current situation is a bigger consideration. People don’t see renters as down-trodden and dispossesed. I think an aguement to break the ankle of “the man” will in this place and time fall on deaf and dead tired from working, ears.

  3. I liked your blog subversify.com. I found your blog recently and was reading it for a few days. I appreciate your time and effort. Keep it that way.

  4. Judge Mahoney, the judge in this case, died six months later in an “accident”. No wonder no other judge dares take on our fraudulent banking system! END THE FED!!!!!!!!!! Fractional Reserve Banking IS a pyramid scheme! infowars-dot-com

  5. It’s actually a great and helpful piece of information. I am happy that you shared this helpful info with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thanks for sharing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.