Arrowdale Municipal Golf Course (Brantford, Haldimand Province)

Posted on February 3rd, 2020 by in Mavic Mini

You are viewing an old revision of this post, from February 3, 2020 @ 23:29:08. See below for differences between this version and the current revision.

An undeveloped corner of the Orginal 807 (null surrender 30) acres designated as a white man’s reservation (https://tworowtimes.com/historical/brants-ford-was-a-whiteman-reserve), is now an endangered space for the aging and growing community. Although the Brantford City Hall wants to sell off this small tract of land, the lands shall not be developed until a full audit of the cities risk and obligation to the U.E. Mohawks have been fully considered and assessed. The U.E. Mohawk is the named real party in interest to the Haldimand Pledge and Proclamation and the acquired territory known as the Haldimand Tract, The city has been put on notice of these special interests. The city is aware of the ongoing land claims processes in the courts, and they are aware of the desire of the U.E. Mohawks to recover the lands from the city as extraterritorial under the Haldimand Pledge and Mohawk lands registry system.

1763 ROYAL PROCLAMATION

By Royal Proclamation dated October 7, 1763, the Imperial Crown recognized indigenous title in the North American colonies including Canada, reserved large tracts of land for Indians, and assumed fiduciary responsibilities to protect the indigenous peoples in the enjoyment of their inherent and aboriginal rights and in particular in the possession and use of their lands. Pursuant to the Royal Proclamation of 1763, no lands were to be taken from indigenous people without their express consent. In particular: (a) colonial governments were forbidden to grant any unceded Indian lands; (b) private parties were forbidden to settle on unceded Indian lands; (c) private parties were forbidden to purchase or otherwise possess unceded Indian lands; and (d) a system of public purchases was adopted as the official mode of extinguishing Indian title.

The Royal Proclamation of 1763 recognized the constitutional crime of “Misprision of Treason,” which has no legal meaning other than as a sanction against colonial officials and judges who prematurely assume jurisdiction. Indeed, Blackstone’s authoritative Commentaries on the Law of England, published in 1825, gives as the classic example for misprision of treason the breach of faith to the Queen’s allies attendant upon disregarding the terms of a royal proclamation. Furthermore, the newcomers’ taking of Indian land without the Indians’ prior consent is the classic form of “Pretence” and “great Fraud and Abuse” that the proclamation constitutionally intended to preclude.

These words, “Misprision of Treason”, “Pretence” and “Fraud” are the proclamation’s words, not mine. I do not say these words to shock; they are the words of existing law – and to bring the law into courts of law without using these words is impossible, for these words are the body and soul of the law. The injustice resulting from the constitutionally prohibited premature assumption of jurisdiction by the newcomers courts and band councils imposes “serious mental harm” upon a “national, ethnical, racial or religious group,” and therefore constitutes “complicity in genocide” within the meaning articles 2(b) and 3(e) of the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948.

FourtyBee is an outlet to publish aerial photos, videos, and stories about the evolution of drone technology, documenting ongoing land encroachments; residential and commercial development. We capture images, videos and stories from landmarks to people, we research the history of Grand River Country (and beyond) from a Mohawk perspective.

Following the Royal Proclamation of 1763, there was a long series of cases that recognized and affirmed the nature and character of aboriginal rights. The series is too long to permit going into each one in the time allotted for the making of these considerations. What the long series of cases confirms is that all the British crown ever claimed in virtue of its assertion of crown sovereignty was the exclusive right to buy jurisdiction and possession from the aboriginal people. And then only if the aboriginal people are, as the Royal Proclamation confirmed, “inclined to dispose” of the land.

FourtyBee is an outlet to publish aerial photos, videos, and stories about the evolution of drone technology, documenting ongoing land encroachments; residential and commercial development. We capture images, videos and stories from landmarks to people, we research the history of Grand River Country (and beyond) from a Mohawk perspective.

Until that bilateral and consensual purchase is completed, the aboriginal and for greater certainty, the Mohawk people are constitutionally guaranteed the integrity and inviolability of their previously enjoyed jurisdiction and possession.

Fraudulent Surrender number 30, under the Haldimand Pledge, vandalized by 28 Sachems and Chiefs of the “Six Nation” on April 19, 1830, sold 807 acres of land – land that came to be known as the Brantford town plot – to the Crown for “5 shillings of lawful money of Upper Canada.” No wampums confirming the sale on record.

Article Attachments

Post Revisions:

  • February 3, 2020 @ 23:29:08 by Benjamin Doolittle U.E.

Changes:

February 3, 2020 @ 23:29:08Current Revision
Content
Deleted: An undeveloped corner of the Orginal 807 (null surrender 30) acres designated as a white man's reservation (https://tworowtimes.com/ historical/brants-ford-was- a-whiteman-reserve), is now an endangered space for the aging and growing community. Although the Brantford City Hall wants to sell off this small tract of land, the lands shall not be developed until a full audit of the cities risk and obligation to the U.E. Mohawks have been fully considered and assessed. The U.E. Mohawk is the named real party in interest to the Haldimand Pledge and Proclamation and the acquired territory known as the Haldimand Tract, The city has been put on notice of these special interests. The city is aware of the ongoing land claims processes in the courts, and they are aware of the desire of the U.E. Mohawks to recover the lands from the city as extraterritorial under the Haldimand Pledge and Mohawk lands registry system.  Added: An undeveloped corner of the Orginal 807 (null surrender 30) acres designated as a <a href="https:/ /fourtybee.com/ media/Brants_ Ford_was_a_whiteman_ reserve.pdf">white man's reservation</a>, is now an endangered space for the aging and growing community. Although the Brantford City Hall wants to sell off this small tract of land, the lands shall not be developed until a full audit of the cities risk and obligation to the U.E. Mohawks have been fully considered and assessed. The U.E. Mohawk is the named real party in interest to the Haldimand Pledge and Proclamation and the acquired territory known as the Haldimand Tract, The city has been put on notice of these special interests. The city is aware of the ongoing land claims processes in the courts, and they are aware of the desire of the U.E. Mohawks to recover the lands from the city as extraterritorial under the Haldimand Pledge and Mohawk lands registry system.
Deleted: 1763 ROYAL PROCLAMATION  
Deleted: By Royal Proclamation dated October 7, 1763, the Imperial Crown recognized indigenous title in the North American colonies including Canada, reserved large tracts of land for Indians, and assumed fiduciary responsibilities to protect the indigenous peoples in the enjoyment of their inherent and aboriginal rights and in particular in the possession and use of their lands. Pursuant to the Royal Proclamation of 1763, no lands were to be taken from indigenous people without their express consent. In particular: (a) colonial governments were forbidden to grant any unceded Indian lands; (b) private parties were forbidden to settle on unceded Indian lands; (c) private parties were forbidden to purchase or otherwise possess unceded Indian lands; and (d) a system of public purchases was adopted as the official mode of extinguishing Indian title.  
Deleted: The Royal Proclamation of 1763 recognized the constitutional crime of "Misprision of Treason," which has no legal meaning other than as a sanction against colonial officials and judges who prematurely assume jurisdiction. Indeed, Blackstone's authoritative Commentaries on the Law of England, published in 1825, gives as the classic example for misprision of treason the breach of faith to the Queen's allies attendant upon disregarding the terms of a royal proclamation. Furthermore, the newcomers' taking of Indian land without the Indians' prior consent is the classic form of "Pretence" and "great Fraud and Abuse" that the proclamation constitutionally intended to preclude.  
Deleted: These words, "Misprision of Treason", "Pretence" and "Fraud" are the proclamation's words, not mine. I do not say these words to shock; they are the words of existing law - and to bring the law into courts of law without using these words is impossible, for these words are the body and soul of the law. The injustice resulting from the constitutionally prohibited premature assumption of jurisdiction by the newcomers courts and band councils imposes "serious mental harm" upon a "national, ethnical, racial or religious group," and therefore constitutes "complicity in genocide" within the meaning articles 2(b) and 3(e) of the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948.  
  Added: <iframe style="border: none; overflow: hidden;" src="https:// www.facebook.com/plugins/ video.php?href= https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FOneWayCurrent%2Fvideos%2F10157815210321181%2F&amp; show_text=1&amp;width=560" width="100%" height="495" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen= "allowfullscreen"></iframe>
  Added: <h1>1763 Royal Proclamation</h1>
  Added: By Royal Proclamation dated October 7, 1763, the Imperial Crown recognized indigenous title in the North American colonies including Canada, reserved large tracts of land for Indians, and assumed fiduciary responsibilities to protect the indigenous peoples in the enjoyment of their inherent and aboriginal rights and in particular in the possession and use of their lands.
Deleted: Following the Royal Proclamation of 1763, there was a long series of cases that recognized and affirmed the nature and character of aboriginal rights. The series is too long to permit going into each one in the time allotted for the making of these considerations. What the long series of cases confirms is that all the British crown ever claimed in virtue of its assertion of crown sovereignty was the exclusive right to buy jurisdiction and possession from the aboriginal people. And then only if the aboriginal people are, as the Royal Proclamation confirmed, "inclined to dispose" of the land. Added: Pursuant to the Royal Proclamation of 1763, no lands were to be taken from indigenous people without their express consent. In particular: (a) colonial governments were forbidden to grant any unceded Indian lands; (b) private parties were forbidden to settle on unceded Indian lands; (c) private parties were forbidden to purchase or otherwise possess unceded Indian lands, and (d) a system of public purchases was adopted as the official mode of extinguishing Indian title.
  Added: The Royal Proclamation of 1763 recognized the constitutional crime of "Misprision of Treason," which has no legal meaning other than as a sanction against colonial officials and judges who prematurely assume jurisdiction.
  Added: Indeed, Blackstone's authoritative Commentaries on the Law of England, published in 1825, gives as the classic example for misprision of treason the breach of faith to the Queen's allies attendant upon disregarding the terms of a royal proclamation.
  Added: Furthermore, the newcomers' taking of Indian land without the Indians' prior consent is the classic form of "Pretence" and "great Fraud and Abuse" that the proclamation constitutionally intended to preclude.
  Added: These words, "Misprision of Treason", "Pretence" and "Fraud" are the proclamation's words, not mine. I do not say these words to shock; they are the words of existing law - and to bring the law into courts of law without using these words is impossible, for these words are the body and soul of the law.
  Added: The injustice resulting from the constitutionally prohibited premature assumption of jurisdiction by the newcomers courts and band councils imposes "serious mental harm" upon a "national, ethnical, racial or religious group," and therefore constitutes "complicity in genocide" within the meaning articles 2(b) and 3(e) of the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948.
  Added: Following the Royal Proclamation of 1763, there was a long series of cases that recognized and affirmed the nature and character of aboriginal rights. The series is too long to permit going into each one in the time allotted for the making of these considerations.
  Added: What the long series of cases confirms is that all the British crown ever claimed in virtue of its assertion of crown sovereignty was the exclusive right to buy jurisdiction and possession from the aboriginal people. And then only if the aboriginal people are, as the Royal Proclamation confirmed, "inclined to dispose" of the land.
Unchanged: Until that bilateral and consensual purchase is completed, the aboriginal and for greater certainty, the Mohawk people are constitutionally guaranteed the integrity and inviolability of their previously enjoyed jurisdiction and possession. Unchanged: Until that bilateral and consensual purchase is completed, the aboriginal and for greater certainty, the Mohawk people are constitutionally guaranteed the integrity and inviolability of their previously enjoyed jurisdiction and possession.
Unchanged: Fraudulent Surrender number 30, under the Haldimand Pledge, vandalized by 28 Sachems and Chiefs of the "Six Nation" on April 19, 1830, sold 807 acres of land - land that came to be known as the Brantford town plot - to the Crown for "5 shillings of lawful money of Upper Canada." No wampums confirming the sale on record. Unchanged: Fraudulent Surrender number 30, under the Haldimand Pledge, vandalized by 28 Sachems and Chiefs of the "Six Nation" on April 19, 1830, sold 807 acres of land - land that came to be known as the Brantford town plot - to the Crown for "5 shillings of lawful money of Upper Canada." No wampums confirming the sale on record.
video_url
Deleted:  Added: s1RZfpXK6Io
post_views_count
Deleted:  Added: 813
media_credit
Deleted:  Added: youtube.com/FourtyBee
land
Deleted:  Added: Fraudulent Surrender number 30, under the Haldimand Pledge, vandalized by 28 Sachems and Chiefs of the “Six Nation” on April 19, 1830, sold 807 acres of land – land that came to be known as the Brantford town plot – to the Crown for “5 shillings of lawful money of Upper Canada.” No wampums confirming the sale on record.
story_lines_size
Deleted:  Added: 25
story_lines_float
Deleted:  Added: center
story_lines_highlights
Deleted:  Added: Array, Array

Note: Spaces may be added to comparison text to allow better line wrapping.

Article Attachments

Media Format: View Video posts

Recent Posts

Land Information:

  • Fraudulent Surrender number 30, under the Haldimand Pledge, vandalized by 28 Sachems and Chiefs of the “Six Nation” on April 19, 1830, sold 807 acres of land – land that came to be known as the Brantford town plot – to the Crown for “5 shillings of lawful money of Upper Canada.” No wampums confirming the sale on record.

Tags: arrowdale, arrowdale municipal golf course, brantford, development, flight, haldimand tract, mohawk, pledge, proclamation, royal proclamation, six nations, surrender number 30. Want to see all the Tags?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *