The Plan for the Restoration of Constitutional Government

Abbreviated Version
(includes only a few portions of the overall plan)
Preface

This Plan for the Restoration of Constitutional Government, as explained in “The Question”, is purely hypothetical. It is, however, a natural evolution from the “You Have Tread On Me – Petition“, as the Revolutionary War was a natural evolution from the Olive Branch Petition.

In adapting this sequence of events to modern times, it needs to be understood that times have changed and the possibility of a gathering of “revolutionary” delegates in one place would be fatal to the cause.

Understanding this difficulty, the expedient for today is that individuals would sign and submit, to their respective representatives in the federal government, individual petitions as “redress of grievances, as per Article I of the Bill of Rights.

Absent a positive response to the Petition, one could safely conclude that the government had no more intention of addressing the grievances than King George III did. This, by colonial standards, would put one in a “state of nature” — absent an operating Constitutional government — wherein he, as a free man, has every right to associate with others of similar circumstance.

An earlier article, by the author of this Plan, provides some insight into this aspect of the Founders’ thinking process when they realized that they could no longer live under government that did not recognize their rights (see Sons of Liberty #14).

As you progress through this hypothetical Plan, you will not that there are short sketches (Historical Perspective) that provide a brief example of the historical conditions that can be equated with each part of the Plan.

The Plan, then, is an effort to parallel the activities of the Founders into a theoretical plan that emulates the progression of events, culminating in the creation of the United States of America.

The Plan is made as detailed as expedient for the variety of possible circumstance that might arise. Plans, however, can never be made so rigid that they will work under all conditions. Therefore, it is intended to provide sufficient detail so that creative minds could easily refine the Plan into a working model for immediate and local conditions.

Often, elements of the Plan call to mind other works by this author, and, works by others, in which cases, links are provided to those works to provide additional insight which might assist in more detailed planning.

The Plan is provided for your pleasure and education. What you do with it is up to you, and, what you do not do with it is a point of consideration for your posterity.

G. H.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Question:

A question was raised, a few months ago, in a conversation with a friend. The question was, “Could a Revolution be conducted in the modern world considering modern technology, extensive government troops, and battle field weapons?” At first thought, the task seems so ominous, so daunting and against such odds, that it would be impractical, if not impossible.

Upon reflecting on what must have been equally daunting to the Founding Fathers, it is not, as first anticipated, such an ominous task.

The Founding Fathers faced British forces — the best-trained and most successful military in the then world. Its navy was master of the seas; its land forces had recently defeated the French and had forced colonization around the world. It controlled the local government, and had enacted laws that gave it nearly arbitrary control over the colonies.

The colonies had few things working for them. They had a lack of experience, except those who had recently fought alongside the British in the French-Indian Wars; some had learned to defend themselves against hostile Indians, and thus learned fighting tactics used by the Indians. They had local knowledge of the topography. And, they had the fortitude and persistence that had helped their forefathers, and themselves, overcome the obstacles of taming a land that had been little changed from its natural state.

Against them were: Substantial numbers of highly trained soldiers; Unlimited supplies and resources, although most of them were located across the ocean and had to be transported, this taking months; A multitude of locations, bases, within and around the colonies; Mastery of the waterways; And, many of the military leaders had experience both with fighting Indians and working alongside the colonists.

In those first eventful days of April, May, and June 1775, the colonists learned what their weaknesses were and what some of their strengths were. They learned that they were not trained, nor were they inclined to fight face-to-face on the battlefield. They learned that the tactics of the Indians, ambush by surprise and hit and run tactics would damage both morale and manpower of the British. They learned that living to fight another day was more important than victory in a battle; that skirmishes were the best tactic, unless a major battle had a high degree of probability of being won.. One of the major drawbacks in their efforts was that of selecting officers who were astute enough to challenge the ways of traditional warfare.

But, they did, with their persistence and their faith in God, prevail — not by might, rather by tactics and fortitude.

Just how would they fight, today? Surely, they would adapt their tactics to the ‘battlefield’ and would realize the political necessity of securing faith and assistance from the non-combatants. There are many other generalities that can be addressed, but of greater importance will be the actual circumstances of today’s world and the necessity to develop new tactics in order to overcome obstacles that present themselves, as the battle begins. This is a theoretical answer to that question.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Some Thoughts

This plan, after years of discussion and contemplation, coupled with an understanding of what the Founders did to challenge the authority of the power of government, was developed as a guideline that would answer the question of whether it would be possible, today, to emulate the actions of those Founders to achieve the same end.

The desire to change government back to its Constitutional limitations would best be served if no blood were shed. The impracticality of achieving that end, along with the knowledge that blood has already been shed, moves us to the second position — that the minimum amount of blood be shed, and, that of if blood is to be shed, that it include an absolute minimum of innocent blood.

There is little doubt that during a conflict, blood will be shed, when necessary, in the course of that conflict. Knowing that any innocent blood shed is a detriment to the image of those who seek to return to Constitutional government, every effort should be made to “pick the ground” for open conflict, with special consideration to locations that will have the least impact on innocent bystanders.

In the selection of ‘targets’, outside of the normal area of conflict (aggravation), the following should be taken into consideration.

Though accident, error, and, perhaps, judging wrongly, the actions of those who might be targeted, it is far better to isolate those errors to people who, if not guilty, at least are in a position and have acted in such a manner that their guilt is probable.

There is also the moral consideration — that those who are willing to strike, as the Founders did, do so in violation of the laws, as they exist, today. When they make a decision to “target” someone, or, something, they should consider just how the “target” would be construed by those who will, eventually, make judgment on their actions. The most important consideration, however, would be the judgment made by God and the person doing the act. If that act is motivated for purposes of revenge, God will judge, and, the person will have to live with, the consequences.

On the other hand, if the act is one that is surely one of retribution for acts of the target, whether corporate property or an individual life, and has clearly demonstrated by a pattern on the part of the person or entity, then, surely, God will judge as necessary, and, the actor will have a clear mind.

Where possible, all players in the act, and, even more desirable, others who can safely be associated with and brought into, if not the plan, at least the determination of the validity of the ‘target’, the collective judgment, serving as a sort of jury, considering both the guilt and the demonstrable necessity of the action, will provide the best assurance of a desirable final judgment, and a clear conscience for those involved.

If blood is to be shed, every consideration should be made that the blood deserves to be shed.

Some considerations for the evaluation of a ‘target’:

* Have lives been lost as direct, or indirect, result of the actions of the ‘target’, acting in violation of the Constitution or constitutional laws of the land?
* Has there been a continual loss of property by people who should have had that property protected, under the Constitution or constitutional laws?
* If a foreign nation, say, Russia, were to invade the United States, would the target become a collaborator, turning against the United States and the Constitution?

Note: The possibility that if there were sufficient ‘friends” (collaborators) of a foreign power, these ‘friends’ who might encourage participation by that foreign power, is to be considered. The discouragement of his sort of person (potential collaborators) would be as desirable as the discouragement of all other potential ‘targets’.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
I. Small units, small acts of aggravation
Overview

Directed activities intended to establish the existence of an air of dissatisfaction among some of the citizens of the country. These actions might include targeted individuals and/or businesses that have proven their disdain for the Constitution; violated the Constitution by their actions or activities; are supportive of those who violate the Constitution, or, have failed in their obligations to the people under contracts, such as insurance companies who have failed to make good under their policies.

Understand that the authority that the sitting (de facto, rebel) government has emanated from the Constitution, and, that this government was instituted under the limits described by of the Constitution. [Note: Let it be understood that the term "rebel", within this article, is applied to the de facto government that has rebelled against the Constitution that created it.]

The Constitution, having been created by the People, is only capable of passing to the government authority that they, themselves, possess (Let’s Talk About the Constitution). Understanding, then, that if the rebel government has assumed that it has powers, derived from that Constitution, though not enumerated therein, it has usurped authority, and that it assumes the people, themselves, had. Given that the rebel government has assumed that they have the right to kidnap, torture and assassinate, they have, by their actions, acknowledged that the people, too, have that authority, at least until Constitutional government is restored. If it is used as the means of usurpation, then, surely, is is fairly used by those who intend to restore Constitutional government.

Given the understanding that we must fight our foe from as high a moral ground as possible, it is always our right, and within our lawful authority, to engage that foe in the same manner as they engage us. This, however, only speaks to the state of nature that many have found themselves cast into. Committees of Safety, Militia and judicial bodies are bound by a higher standard, in their official capacity, than those who speak for themselves, or, as members of cells or teams. Consequently, the Committees of Safety, Militia, and judicial bodies created under their authority shall not prosecute or impede those who have found themselves compelled to take individual action against the rebel government.

In all cases, care should be taken to assure that the “target” can be exploited for the benefit of the effort to restore Constitutional government, and should, as much as possible, be conducted so as to have a minimum detrimental impact on the civilian population. If the purpose of the activities being conducted is designed to restore rights and the Constitution, a total regard for those rights, except for those targeted, must be adhered to.

These directed activities should be evaluated for the desired effect, and can include:
Examples:

* Law enforcement officers who have abused citizens, without provocation
* Insurance companies who have not fulfilled their obligations for losses sustained
* People in positions of public trust who have blatantly violated their oath of office
* People in positions of public trust who have blatantly lied to the American public.
* People who have proven themselves inimical to the Constitution (Bad Guys)
* Federal Reserve Banks (nine banks)
* Special Interest Groups inimical to the Constitution (i.e. ACORN, SEIU)

Historical Perspective

In many of the colonies, acts which were illegal, under any form of law, were conducted by various groups and individuals concerned over the imposition of stricter laws and taxes being imposed on the colonists. Those acts of Parliament were deemed outside of the authority of Parliament because the British Constitution secured certain rights, and, the existing Charters, which had created government in the colonies, were being ignored.

Numerous incidents occurred, which we are all familiar with, that would fall within the area of illegal activity. In most of them, the Committees of Safety (or equivalent, and, the militia, were not directly involved in the activities. History leads us to understand, however, that there was, at least, tacit approval of the activity, if they were not ordered and directed by Committees and Militia.

Holding to that which is most commonly known, we can look to incidents such as the harassment of the soldiers in Boston, one such incident resulting in the Boston Massacre. We can look to the various events where a tax collector, or other official was, “tarred and feathered”, often resulting in death. We know that many officials were kidnapped, bound hand and foot, and paraded through town in a cart, or “on a rail”, wearing signs “proclaiming” their unlawful activates. We have small groups of colonists tearing down homes, warehouses, and customs offices. And, in perhaps the best-known instance of illegal activity, we have a band of “Indians” marching through the streets of Boston to the wharf, where they boarded ships and dump the tea into the harbor, resulting in the destruction of the equivalent value of millions of dollars in damage.

All of these instances were conducted outside of any lawful authority, and, if any trial was held, history does not reflect such. Private Citizens, who felt compelled to demonstrate their feelings against the unlawful actions of the government by unlawful actions of their own, conducted them. They were, quite simply, willing to face the consequences of their actions in order to make clear to the government that the usurpation of authority would not be tolerated.

Interestingly, there were never any ‘witnesses’ to these events, and, had charges been brought, the jury would surely have come back with a verdict of “not guilty”. Most importantly, understand that the people who did not participate in these activities, even though they knew that they were not legal, were willing to hide people, knowledge and anything that might be incriminating from the government.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
II. Units join together in small regions (counties), greater acts of aggravation
Overview

As units acquire experience and others join the ranks, larger targets become viable, and, will produce, in many cases, more effective results, as well as other objectives that were impractical with smaller units.

Units in close proximity to other units might join forces to conduct even larger operations.
Historical Perspective

During the Revolutionary War period, it was much easier for a group of people, whether militia, or not, to exert their influence in matters of concern. There was no massive police force structure, as there is today. At best, constables, sheriffs and justices of the peace, along with the citizens, themselves, formed as a posse, were ‘law enforcement’. Today, militarily armed mini-armies comprise the Law Enforcement community. What we have, today, would have been considered the “standing Army” that was addressed in the Declaration of Independence.

Within their playing field, the colonists could muster forces to effect illegal activities in support of their desire to return to the British Constitution and their respective charters. Thus, in the Carolinas and Massachusetts, we have examples of such activity. The most well known, of course, is those militia members who stood defiant at Lexington, under authority of their Committee of Safety, on April 19, 1775. Clearly, they were in violation of the law, as were those in Concord, North Bridge and along Battle Road, that same day.

Other events preceded April 19, 1775, and which would be considered illegal, but were conducted by units from different communities working together, can be found in The End of the Revolution and the Beginning of Independence.

Understand that the changed playing field has precluded such direct actions, though similar actions, were conducted by the Founders; a consideration of the expediency and necessity of covert actions does nothing to detract from emulating the actions of the Founders.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
III. Connections created between county elements, offensive and defensive operations
Overview

By this time, there will be a clear indication to the people that the occurrences of the recent past are not random, nor are they temporary and limited. It will be apparent, to most of those who are not tied to their daily regimen, that there is something afoot.

Forces will have begun gathering, on both sides, and it is time to consider that activities will, of necessity, become more open and notorious.

Logical conclusions will begin to direct the rebel forces (those in rebellion against the Constitution) to assert their ‘presumed’ authority to groups of individuals who they suspect of any involvement in the ongoing activities.

As operations become larger and more frequent, there will be efforts to create open confrontation, which should be avoided, however, must be prepared for. If a raid is anticipated, an ambush should be planned.

Consideration of just who might be an enemy (rebel), whether the protection of the community warrants, and what might be done to prevent participation by certain people, suspected of being in support of the rebel forces, should be included in operational planning.
Historical Perspective

On April 12, 1775, John Hancock, President of the Massachusetts Provincial Congress (Massachusetts Committee of Safety) called for all counties to appoint Committees of Safety. This call was not in anticipation of the events to occur exactly one week later, it was over the realization that the events occurring in Western Massachusetts would, without a doubt, lead to an escalation of the confrontations between colonies and the Crown. (See The End of the Revolution and the Beginning of Independence)

The Militia at Lexington, and, shortly thereafter, Militia from around the area of Lexington and Concord found that they were being called to defend the Rights of Englishman. It was no surprise and had been anticipated for a while. The time, however, had come to put words into action. The law, if you will, was set aside, at least with regard to opposition to Royal government forces.

Militia from four colonies rose to the occasion, flooding the area around Boston with tens of thousands of militiamen. Jurisdictional boundaries ceased to exist when the fight for Independence began.

Many Committees of Safety charged some people with being inimical to the cause of American Liberty; barred them from keeping their long arms; seized their property; and jailed them.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
IV. Coordinated efforts, securing facilities, allegiances and prisoners
Overview

Firmly established, in small pockets, primarily in rural locations, it is time to begin “breaking out” with aggressive actions to expand the areas controlled by the Constitutional forces.

The first consideration should probably be sabotage. Sabotage is disruptive, generates fear, and has a negative impact on the supplies and manpower of the rebels. Targets should be selected for maximum impact on the rebel forces and facilities with a minimum impact on civilians, wherever possible.

If power, communications, or other utilities are to be targeted, they should be targeted at locations that will close to the targeted rebel facilities or functions, thereby causing as little disruption as possible to the civilian infrastructure.

Convoys and supply transportation facilities provide dual benefit. They deprive the rebels of supplies while supplementing Constitutional force supplies, often providing equipment and materials that might otherwise not be readily available to those forces.

National Guard armories and Reserve unit training facilities are ideal targets. Personnel within these facilities might be enlisted against the rebels, while supplies, materials, munitions, transportation and communication equipment, and a facility from which to conduct operation, is a result of such actions.

The more facilities that are taken, the more difficult the rebel’s ability to attempt to recover what was lost, becomes. It does spread the Constitutional forces out, so plans should be made to assure that reserve capabilities are maintained to support against such efforts by the rebels.
Historical Perspective

The first historical instance of cooperation between various Committees and Militia occurred on April 19, as militia, at the direction of their respective Committees, and, individuals concerned with what was happening, secured all but the shipping lanes to Boston and the harbor.

Artemas Ward was appointed General of the Army of Observation encircling Boston by the Massachusetts Provincial Congress. He was displaced later when George Washington was appointed General of the Army by the Continental Congress and resigned as a delegate to take his place in command at Boston. This transition of authority (and responsibility) was directed by the civil authority, in both assignments. It was a consolidation of forces.

In the South, many local militia joined with others to mount actions against Royal forces and/or Tories. The Battle of Kings Mountain stands out as a very successful assault conducted by forces from various militia units, consolidated under a single command, which resulted in the defeat and capture of a significant Loyalist force.

Courts were established by Committees of Safety to deal with crimes and Tories. Civil matters were left unattended to for the duration of the war.

Many people in positions of authority, or, who had been questioned regarding their allegiances, were required, during the war, to take a loyalty oath. One such oath ended with the following phrase, “If I betray this oath, I agree to suffer the punishment of a traitor.”

* * *
Militia committee

Militia committees, coordinating with their counterparts of secured areas of the state, need to begin evaluating the consolidation of the Militia forces. Recommendations for officer’s commissions should be based upon the size of a command.

Common rank of officers and size of militia units:
Squad 8-16 corporal or Sergeant
Platoon 25-60 Lieutenant & Staff Sergeant
Company 70-250 Captain & First Sergeant
Battalion 300-1000 Major & Sgt. Major
Regiment 2000-3000 Colonel & staff
Brigade 4000-5000 Brigadier General & staff
Division 10,000-20,000 Major General & staff
Corps 30,000-80,000 Lt. General & staff
Army 60,000-100,000 General & staff

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
V. Institution of governmental elements (county)
Overview

As entire, or nearly entire, county areas come into the control of the Constitutional forces, the necessity of reestablishing necessary government functions will require participation by all existing Committees within the county. What is instituted at this point is anticipated to be a final and permanent government within the geographic area. It is to replace the existing structure of government with one intended to provide only the services necessary for the function of county government, in accordance with the constitutions. Its purpose is to create a comfortable environment and protection of private property. It is not to be assumed to be legislative, except as deemed absolutely necessary.

Once sufficient County Committees are created, a State Committee of Safety should be created.
Historical Perspective

As Royal government was displaced, Committees of Safety began filling the void created by that absence. The Continental Congress had been populated by delegates sent up from either local Committees, or, where a Provincial Committee had been established, by the Provincial Committee.

There was no concerted effort by the Crown to subdue such gatherings, until it was too late. The Third Continental Congress approved the Declaration of Independence.

Geographically, there was no problem convening the Continental Congress. Today, however, once such endeavor is begun, it would most surely, be a target of attack, kidnap, or assassination. An alternate means of assembling should be considered until security can be provided for larger meetings.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
VI. Continuation of flow of goods, utilities and communications
Overview

Though addressed earlier, a very important responsibility that must be accepted by the Committees, the Militia and the Correspondents, is that it is vital to the interest of the country to do all that is possible to maintain a flow of food and utilities, and to maintain communication and transportation for the general population.

It can be anticipated that the rebels will attempt to lay blame on the citizens that are seeking to return to Constitutional government as the cause of any disruption of services. On the other hand, if those who are seeking return to proper government can maintain them available, as best they can, it will be reflected in the minds of the people that they are doing all that they can to assure that those services remain available.

There may be times when disruption is necessary, for example, to refuse power or communication to a facility that has been targeted. Once the operation is completed and the objective attained, restoration of any services disrupted can only be to the Constitutional forces’ advantage.

This same spirit must extend to the point of extreme courtesy to the general population. The Constitutional forces image will be easily maintained by thoughtful consideration of the desire for the people to be as little effected by the implementation of the Plan as possible.

The rebels, however, after years of presumption of authority (“them or us mentality”) are prone, by their training, to be abusive, arbitrary, and authoritarian. By comparison, the Constitutional forces will be encouraging a pleasant relationship, as servants of a free people. It is to be constantly addressed, that we are here to serve the people.

In time, the manifestation of the character of the players will make what is happening more easily accepted by the general population, and more conducive to cooperation on their part, and, hopefully, recruitment.
Historical Perspective

During the course of the Revolutionary War, postal services, currency, roads and bridges, ports and harbors, to the extent possible, were maintained by the colonial forces. A number of new roads were built, and, in many instances, old trails were converted into roads.

Every effort was made to continue the importation of goods, both military and others. Trade relations were established with France, Holland and other nations.

Though local supplies, especially food and forage, were deficient in quantity, many other products continued to be available throughout the war.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
VII. Extension of influence into State government
Overview

As occurred at the county level, when sufficient progress has been made in securing substantial areas within the State, even if the capitol of the state remains in rebel hands, an interim government can be established to enhance the efforts of the Committees, Militia, and Network of Correspondents.

Many state agencies have operations centers throughout the state. These facilities can be secured, personnel evaluated, loyalty oaths administered, and continuance of service provided, if within Constitutional authority. Roads and bridges need to be maintained open. Those facilities exist and can be supervised by Militia, Committee members or existing personnel who have taken a loyalty oath. This will be true of other state facilities, as well. Those facilities that operate outside of Constitutional authority (such as Child Protective Services, Welfare offices, etc.) should remain closed, rented out, sold, or otherwise utilized to provide financial assistance to the efforts to restore the Constitutional government. Determination of what is operating outside of Constitutional authority will be determined by the Committee of Safety.

Since all of the states have adopted Constitutions, those existing constitutions should, in most cases, provide sufficient security for the people and their rights. It should be understood that at the end of the Civil War, many states were required to submit new constitutions to the federal government, for approval, prior to ratification. During that same period, many states amended their constitution to come in line with federal ‘requirements’. States that entered the Union after the Civil War had ratified constitutions that were, in some aspects, inconsistent with the Constitution.

It is recommended that all states revert to their respective Constitution, and laws, as they existed on July 4, 1860 (prior to the civil war and changes subsequent thereto). States admitted to the Union after that date should review their respective Constitution with regard to what is inconsistent with the purpose of the Constitution, or, appears to be a federal requirement for admission to the Union.

This course precludes the necessity of the review of thousands of laws to determine if they are constitutional and in the best interest of the people. Constitutional amendments can be re-ratified, if they are in the best interest of the people, and laws that serve that purpose can be reenacted. It would appear to be far less difficult to begin from then and work forward than to, piecemeal, undo the plethora of legislation that has not been enacted with the best interest of the people in mind.

It is also time, as each state reenters the Constitutional Union, to declare their purpose. A Declaration of the Dissolution of Government, which purpose is to present to the world the cause for which Constitutional return is sought, should be declared and made public.

This Declaration should be considered only as a model. During the course of conflict, as occurred during the Revolutionary War, more elements of tyrannical, or unconstitutional events occurred. Some of those elements that had been suggested, earlier, by the colonists, were abandoned as insignificant to the overall. At the time that the participating states subscribe to the Declaration, it should have been brought up to the needs and exigencies of the time.
Historical Perspective

On May 10, 1776, the Continental Congress recommended that the various states “adopt such government as shall, in the opinion of the representatives of the people, best conduce to the happiness and safety of their constituents in particular and America in general.”

Even though they had existing charters, the colonies chose to determine their futures in accordance with what the people felt most conducive to their future security. Though new constitutions were not adopted by all of the states, the form of government within each of the colonies was revised to meet the exigencies of the day. Many continued to operate under their original charters, with the exception of any appointments made by, or allegiances made to, the Crown.

Two months later, on July 4, 1776, the States, united, declared to the world their purpose with the adoption of the Declaration of Independence.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
VIII. Extension of influence into federal government agencies
Overview

Many federal agencies have operations centers throughout the states. These facilities can be secured, personnel evaluated, and continuance of service provided, if within Constitutional authority. Most federal agencies serve no useful purpose, within Constitutional guidelines, so their facilities can be used for other purpose. No federal taxes should be collected from individuals, however, any revenue that is or funds received should be seized and held, to be provide to the Constitutional Compliance Convention, once established.

Since many agencies of the federal government have offices in the states, as the states are secured, their offices are within the geography controlled by the Constitutional forces. Securing these facilities, and encouraging participation by their employees, should be pursued as diligently as possible.

It is also time for putting the de facto government on notice. Understanding the need to advise the government, the people, and, the world, of the intentions of the Constitutional forces, a Declaration of the Dissolution of Government should be executed by all states that have been secured sufficiently to have created an Advisory Council. This step might be warranted earlier in the process, though by this stage in the progression of events, becomes imperative. States coming into the ability to execute the Declaration may add their voice as that capability is realized.
Historical Perspective

During the course of the Revolutionary War, there was an ebb and flow of areas controlled. Boston, Charleston, New York, and Philadelphia are the most pronounced instances. The securing of enemy positions, extending the areas of control facilitated the colonists needs for mobility, communication and equipment, forage and food. Similarly, as secured areas were enlarged, the British found greater difficulty in obtaining supplies, forage, and food. Ultimately, this lead to the downfall of Cornwallis at Yorktown.

When sufficient numbers of colonies had decided that the failure of the Olive Branch Petition (See Under One Banner Petition) was indicative of the course that must be pursued, at all hazard, they joined together to Declare Independence from the British government, on July 4, 1776. This declaration was a restatement of their grievances and was notice to the World of the position that they had taken in regard to the “mother country”. That Declaration was a necessary step in garnering recognition and aid in pursuit of their goals.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
IX. Extension of influence into federal government
Overview

All liaison committees should be actively initiating contact, discussion, and conversion of federal employees, military or any other agents of the de facto government, regarding participating in the effort to restore Constitutional government in the United States.

As agencies of the rebel government come under the control of the Committees, what remains of rebel authority will be, for the most part, contained in Washington, D.C. Their ability to function and control the country will be jeopardized to the point of ineffectiveness.
Historical Perspective

On March 1, 1781, the colonies, united, adopted the Articles of Confederation for “The United States of America”, and, a nation was born. Subsequently, due to defects in the Articles, a “Constitution for the United States of America” was submitted to the then 13 states and was ratified by the nine requisite states on June 21, 1788. That Constitution, and the government created by it, stood well for over half a century.

At the end of the Civil War, amendments were “ratified”, under the condition that states that did not ratify the amendment would not be allowed full status as a state until they did ratify those amendments, beginning with the “Anti-Slavery Amendment”.

That Amendment was not ratified in accordance with the Constitution, since duress was the motivation for many of the states, whose place in the Union was subjugated to federal military districts.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
X. Restoration of Constitutional Government

The Constitutional Compliance Convention shall serve as an interim government until elections can be held. Requirements for Electors shall have been established at the State level (see part III, Judicial committee).

Ballots shall be open to any candidate qualified to hold the office sought, except that, the Candidate shall have been a citizen in which state he chooses for at least two years; shall not, for any legislative or executive position, have been an attorney or any way affiliated with the legal profession; and, shall have taken the loyalty oath and never have been found inimical to the Constitution. Any party affiliation shall not be shown on the ballot.

The Executive Office of Government shall be occupied by an interim Executive Council, comprised of 5 members of the Constitutional Compliance Convention , selected by that Convention, and hold that office until an election for President and Vice-President is held, in accordance with the Constitution.

* * *

End of the Abbreviated Plan

http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=365