Ronald F. Avery

1955 Mt. Vernon

Seguin, Texas 78155




Dear Mr. Lykins,

I want to thank you for your permission to write an extended piece on Constitutional law as a visiting contributor with your one stipulation that it be “high and tight.” Having discovered the State’s “presumption” of “absolute sovereign immunity” to harm the “subjects” in my appeal to the Supreme Court of Texas, I have some qualification to comment upon the present drive to overhaul the “unwieldy” Texas Constitution of 1876. I am certainly devastated by the rulings of the “courts” in regard to “absolute governmental or sovereign immunity” which I proved does not exist in America or in any state in the union except by judicial, legislative and executive corruption of the most egregious and tyrannous type. Yet, I endeavor to encourage both myself and my readers by what I write herein.

Our “representatives” and the media mislead us by referring to Texas and the U.S. as a “democracy.” A democracy is defined in Blacks Law Dictionary as, “That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy.” Whereas a republic is defined in Black’s same as, “That form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens.” What is the “affairs” of government? It is the protection of the property of each individual citizen. Therefore each citizen may use the courts to protect their own property of life, liberty and possessions.

The citizens are distracted today by the manipulators of their passions in order to create the illusion of open government and sovereignty in the citizens. Therefore we read of Gay rights, prayer in school, Ten Commandments in Court Houses, Pro-choice, Pro-life, support our troops, bring them home, conservative and liberal, Republican and Democrat, left and right. But the reality is that none of the members of any of those factions own their life, liberty or any property whatsoever. James Madison gave the answer to this problem in Federalist Letter #49, “But it is the reason, alone, of the public, that ought to control and regulate the government. The passions ought to be controlled and regulated by the government.” We have the reverse. We are attempting to control government with endless passions in conflict rather than using political science and its revealed sole purpose of government to enforce its well founded law to control the passions of the citizens in order to protect the property of each. Alexander Hamilton expressed his knowledge of this in Federalist Letter #9, “The science of politics, however, like most other sciences, has received great improvement. The efficacy of various principles is now well understood, which were either not known at all, or imperfectly known to the ancients.” Government schools have purposely failed to teach the students this science and substituted political science with the ambitions of global financiers wrapped in lofty groundless moral platitudes. No engineering professor would consider teaching phony moral imperatives to design a bridge but professors think nothing of teaching such as the foundation of a nation or justifying a global banking dynasty. The real problems lay beneath the rhetoric of the burning issues of a “democracy.” The government has seized all the property of the citizens including their lives, liberties and possessions and left them to argue over who gets more or less of the straw, mud, and privileges rationed by an omnipotent government.

The purpose of a constitution is to unite the people under a government by common agreement. What would the terms of such a common agreement be? Maybe the terms would be to make the world a better place, to equally share the planetary wealth, to love one another more perfectly, to provide for a retirement of each person or maybe cheaper prescription drugs, or to spread world peace, or to bind us together, to remind us of our roots, to sketch our future, etc., etc.? Regardless of our whim and desires, people have only one capacity by which they can lawfully form a government. Each person has a natural or God given right to protect, with force, their property consisting of life, liberty and possessions. The corollary is that no person has a natural or God given right to invade or harm another’s property. All agree that no person can delegate to another more than held in themselves, therefore, government can only acquire the delegated authority from each individual to protect the property of all the citizens. Government and its officers, employees and agents cannot invade or harm the property of a citizen nor can it enjoy immunity when it does so. Government is limited in power to protect the property of all citizens and it cannot exceed that limit by agreement, legislative act, judicial decision, or executive order or by the majority voting in favor of it. The government cannot acquire something by the votes of those that do not possess it. The sovereign people that create government for their benefit do not have “immunity” to harm others and therefore they cannot delegate that to their government even by voting to grant it.

Virtually all citizens think that when the constitution is violated by contrary laws of the legislature or non-enforcement by the judiciary or executive orders that the constitution continues in effect until others can take the offices that will enforce or correct the law. This is error and ignorance of political science. If you had a contract with a lawn man to pay him monthly for his monthly mowing for one year, would you still owe him if he quit after the second month? Would the contract remain in full force without the mowing? Or would the contract reactivate upon the lawn man’s resumption of mowing your lawn two years later? Therefore, a government that is dissolved by failure to conform to the constitution, cannot lawfully make, execute or enforce any other law, constitutional or otherwise.

The commonly expressed view is that the Texas Constitution is too long as opposed to the U.S. Constitution which is very short. Both the “United States” and the “State of Texas” are dissolved not because of the length of their constitutions but because of the violation of its provisions. And these constitutions cannot be made lawfully binding upon the people while in breach or when somebody shows up later to conform government to its terms if possible.

This is plain political science hidden from the citizens by worthless public schools, colleges and universities. In 1748 Montesquieu wrote of this phenomenon in the Spirit of the Laws, “It is also clear that the monarch who ceases to see to the execution of the laws, through bad counsel or negligence, may easily repair the damage; he has only to change his counsel or correct his own negligence. But in a popular government when the laws have ceased to be executed, as this can come only from the corruption of the republic, the state is already lost.” Monarchy could heal itself if it were initially a lawful form of government. But when a constitutional republic is dissolved by breach it has no authority to convene and act for the people. It must be declared dissolved and another constituted by all newly elected representatives of people of the same mind to unite.

The five means of dissolving a government from within were fully known by our forefathers as expounded in 1689 by John Locke in his Second Treatise of Government, “Whensoever therefore the legislative [all government constituted] shall transgress this fundamental rule of society; and either by ambition, fear, folly or corruption, endeavour to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people; by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and, by the establishment of a new legislative, (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own safety and security, which is the end for which they are in society.” [Brackets added] Therefore we know that it is futile to attempt to restore a republic, with those elected to it, when those once vested with the delegated authority violate the trust of the People granted them in the Constitution. It becomes futile and hopeless to elect persons to hold offices that no longer have authority to operate in any capacity.

We may now ask, “Is the State of Texas presently dissolved by any State governmental miscarriage of the trust or delegated authority from the citizen “to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people?” The trust of the people of Texas can be clearly seen in the following seven provisions of the Texas Constitution that illustrate a knowledge of those principles just discussed. All Article 1 provisions are called the “Bill of Rights.” Art 1 Sec 2: All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient. Art 1 Sec 13: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishment inflicted. All courts shall be open, and every person for an injury done him, in his lands, goods, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law; Art 1 Sec 17: No person's property shall be taken, damaged or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person; and, when taken, except for the use of the State, such compensation shall be first made, or secured by a deposit of money; and no irrevocable or uncontrollable grant of special privileges or immunities, shall be made; but all privileges and franchises granted by the Legislature, or created under its authority shall be subject to the control thereof; Art 1 Sec 19: No citizen of this State shall be deprived of life, liberty, property, privileges or immunities, or in any manner disfranchised, except by the due course of the law of the land; Art 1 Sec 29: To guard against transgressions of the high powers herein delegated, we declare that everything in this "Bill of Rights" is excepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate, and all laws contrary thereto, or to the following provisions [Sec 30 and 31 of Art 1], shall be void. [Brackets added]; Art 2 Sec 1: The powers of the Government of the State of Texas shall be divided into three distinct departments, each of which shall be confided to a separate body of magistracy, to wit: Those which are Legislative to one; those which are Executive to another, and those which are Judicial to another; and no person, or collection of persons, being of one of these departments, shall exercise any power properly attached to either of the others, except in the instances herein expressly permitted; Art 16 Sec 48: All laws and parts of laws now in force in the State of Texas, which are not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States, or to this Constitution, shall continue and remain in force as the laws of this State, until they expire by their own limitation or shall be amended or repealed by the Legislature.

In 1969 the Texas Tort Claims Act (TTCA) was passed by the Legislature which “presumed” to possess “absolute sovereign immunity” to kill the citizens of Texas and steal or destroy all their property of every kind “without recourse to the courts of Texas unless waived by statute (TTCA) or congressional resolution.” This act closed the courts to all suits brought by the citizens against the State of Texas for harming them in anyway except where waived in the TTCA. I personally challenged this Act all the way to the Supreme Court of Texas and they denied my Petition and Motion for Rehearing thereby violating the trust of the Citizens and the delegation of authority placed in the officers and endeavoring by the TTCA and other fallacious judicial rulings to seize all the lives, liberties and possessions of the citizens of Texas against the clear language in the Texas Constitution. The State of Texas is no more, neither does it have authority to make, pass, or enforce any law anywhere nor is there any purpose for the election of any representatives to hold any state office, all of which no longer exist. This is solid political science known and promulgated by our forefathers in the Texas Constitution.

The Supreme Court of Texas has abrogated its authority and acquiesced to the legislative usurpation of their authority by permitting the Texas Legislature to close courts by their passing of the TTCA. This Act violates Art 2 Sec 1 by giving the Legislature judicial power to dismiss cases against the State in violation of Art 1 Sec 13, 17, 19 and 29. The Supreme Court of Texas should have found the TTCA void in accord with Art 1 Sec 29. Texas maintains that the source of “absolute sovereign immunity” comes from Hosner v. DeYoung, an 1847 Supreme Court case that said the State of Texas could not be sued without its permission. This court did not cite any statute, common or case law or constitutional provision whatever to support their decision. All suits brought by citizens against the State used Hosner v. DeYoung as precedent for dismissal up until 1969 when the TTCA was passed. This Act presumed to possess “absolute sovereign immunity” by adoption of the pre-1876 constitution common law (Hosner and those using it as precedent) and then waived some of it. This judicial operation is in violation of Art 16 Sec 48. Hosner v. DeYoung and all those cases antecedent to it are “repugnant” to Art 1 Sec 2, 13, 17, 19 and 29 and therefore cannot be adopted without violating Art 16 Sec 48.

A government that has lost its delegated authority through miscarriages for what ever reason, no matter how some may attempt to justify it, naturally fears the citizen and the revelation of the knowledge of dissolution. This fear causes the unlawful government to take dreadful and appalling steps to remain in power. The very first ploy is to pretend the existence of a constitution lawfully binding upon the citizens. Then “democracy” is used to enflame the passions of the citizens to action while deceiving them into the perception of participatory government. This makes politicians look good as they rally the voters for the moral causes they cook up and propagate with great expense and thought. Foreign wars “to protect the homeland” are a common and ancient technique to distract the citizens concerning the want of authority by the state to exist. James Madison spoke of this in his minutes of the constitutional debates “A standing military with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defense against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended.”

Beneath a dissolved constitution is the law of nature and the return to every individual person of the full authority to be legislator, judge and executor of their own relationships with others and their property. “Government” at this point is in want of authority and exists only by coercion and fear of guns and badges. The only law presently in lawful effect is the law of nature, which as observed earlier, is that no one should harm another in their property consisting of life, liberty and possessions.

The people at this time are free to create another government that will conform to its delegated authority from the citizens limited only to the protection of the property of each individual. When they form this new government they will again agree to no longer act as their own legislator, judge and executor over their relationships with others as long as the government protects them through their delegated authority.

The people of the once “united States of America” and the “Republican State of Texas” are free to form their own government as these entities are dissolved by breach of their constitutions. The only obstacle to freedom and legitimate government that protects it is the ignorance of the people. All the people of this land are slaves and bound by the chains of ignorance kept tight by the media that fans the flames of democracy. But as George Washington said, “the principles of liberty once planted grow like weeds.”

Having shown fully the status of the people and their “government” at this time, what do you think is the motivation for the drive by our present legislators to modify and streamline the constitution via a constitutional convention? It would most likely be to get rid of those really annoying provisions that illuminate the criminals now pretending to be “government officials and representatives.” Until a new government is formed by consent of the people and their newly chosen representatives no “elected official” to a dissolved state can reform, alter or create a lawful government. I pray that the principles of political science in the present Kingdom of Heaven, planted by Christ and watered by the saints, grow like weeds.




Ronald F. Avery