Delay again for R.S. 2477

  In a surprise move, the Interior Department extended its comment period a third time on R.S. 2477, a law adopted in 1866 to spur colonizing of the West. R.S. 2477 granted a right-of-way to rural counties for the construction of highways on public lands (HCN, 3/21/94). When Congress repealed the law in 1976, pre-existing claims of rural highways were grandfathered in, setting off a flurry of claim-staking by rural Western counties, particularly in Utah, which generated 5,000 of the 5,600 pending claims. Interior's draft regulations are intended to determine what exactly constitutes a "highway" and how to verify claims. Environmentalists have supported the Interior Department effort to narrow the definition of a right-of-way and block counties from claiming roads across essentially wild public land. To comment before Jan. 20, write Director, BLM, Room 5555, Main Interior Building, 1849 C St. N.W.,Washington, DC 20240.


Rs2477
chip  westbrook
chip westbrook
May 08, 2009 04:31 PM

I have reached the successful end in finding the roots of the road law and the reasoning for RS 2477.
It is very clear that all roads in the United States are Public unless a deed can be produced showing chain of title, and no valid homestead can exist without a public road.
  If you wish to discuss these facts, I would be glad to show you their origins and why they must be read
this way.

Public roads are those routes chosen at large by the public. As they criss-crossed the countries they
were for the most part game trails, given direction by human influence on the need to proceed from
point to point. Some are boulevards, wide and spacious. Others are defined by a single track. In the
America’s Native Americans used these trails as did Europeans when they came. They were at times
adjusted in places to allow tilling of meadows. Trails and roads were not limited to a few known
places but covered the landmass much as they do on all continents. Their historic longevity was relied
upon by the public. In the U S as new lands were opened toward the west, the rules of transportation
were questioned, as the underlying title to land no longer resided with a sovereign or supreme being, but
rather to the common man, we the people. The tendency was to ignore the claims of others to trails
and roads. So laws had to be written to preserve that which had been an unwritten law for thousands
of years. The very route that Marco Polo took to Cathay can be traveled today as it was in his time
and before. Even the comings and goings of governments has not affected these routes. Yet, here in
the United States we have chosen to ignore law and precedent for personal gain, and the courts have
been a large part of the problem. States in the effort to have laws on the books have ignored their role
as established by the Constitution.

ARTICLE IV:
Section 3 [Admission of States]

(1) New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be
formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the
Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the
States concerned as well as of the Congress.
(2) The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations
respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this
Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any
particular State.

Section 4

The United States shall guarantee every State in the Union a Republican form of Government,
and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of Legislature, or of the
executive ( when the Legislature cannot be convened) against Violence.

 In codifying the laws that were constructed by American citizens out side of U S jurisdiction a part of
what is referred to as RS 2477 Congress sought to protect the common practice that roads and trails
belonged to the public at large.

RS 2477 is an abbreviated form of underlying elements of the law of 1851 law written in Oregon
Territory, all of which are defined by Eminet Domain ( Eminentem 1541AD exalted in rank or station,
and dominicum 550AD sovereign power, belonging to a lord ). This is sometimes referred to as
‘Eminent Domain’. The sovereign in the United States is stated in the first line of the constitution.

 We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice,
ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and
secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.

In these lines are the full thrust of EMINET DOMAIN in all States and Territories joined in the United
States. The people hold the underlying title. They, if you will, are the sovereign. To exercise Eminet
Domain is to strip the overlying title of the freeholder, and to leave the underling title exposed. In the
Land court’s reply to the question of road ownership the statement “it is as protected as if it had
remained with the federal government” lies the fact that once the transferable title has ben removed it
can never be created again. In other words governments that exercise Eminet Domain cannot turn
around and create title over the land and sell it, as governments exist at the will of the people. To
‘establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the
general Welfare’. The 1851 Oregon Territory law was held under the executive branch of the US
government. Territorial law normally has no affect on land but in this rare case the Congress
acquiesced and let the law stand, as it represented the historic will of the people, ‘Eminet Domain’.
This law set aside all roads and trails on lands under the jurisdiction of the federal government by
removing the transferable title on a sixty foot wide strip. In 1866 the law was reintroduced by
Congress with the excepting of those lands reserved for Military and Native Americans, by removing
transferable title over the roads and trails exposes the Grantor’s title ‘We the People of the United
States’ they are preserved forever. Every patent issued before and after the American Revolution
contains a silent assumed exception covering the roads and trails existing at it’s authorization. Land
descriptions of meets and bounds call these ‘monuments’ as do surveys in the sectioned world. The
strongest defense of EMINET DOMAIN lyes at the roots of the Civil War where States who were and
are corporations under control of the Federal government declared that they had a right to cessation
from the union. There, statehood was striped from them by the federal government ‘we the people’.
Their governance became territorial and a General of the Army become their governor. States exist at
the will of the Federal Government and the Federal Government exists at the will of the people.


RS2477 Socialism
Private Rancher
Private Rancher
May 26, 2009 04:12 PM
The reason that Marco Polo's trail can still be travelled is because it traverses communist and socialist countries. In the United States, private property is a cornerstone of our capitalist system. In recent years, RS2477 has become a battle cry for socialists that do not respect private property rights or the American way of life. Judge after judge has stood up against these socialists and sided with private landowners. You lose.
rs 2477
chip westbrook
chip westbrook
Jun 12, 2009 05:53 PM
You should have read your history book. Socialism began in the1830's to 1840's. Marco Polo lived from 1254 to 1324. Your land was granted as a patent from the Federal government, an instrument of ‘We the people’ to the original claim holder. That claim holder had to perform required tasks. First, he or she had to travel to the location. That path taken was set aside as traversed, sixty feet wide, by removing the federal title, leaving only the public’s title which is all inclusive of the United States and it’s Territories. Next, the claimant was required to fence the boundary to identify the area claimed. Then a liveable structure had to be built in which the claimant was required to inhabit. Then the land had to be improved through agricultural means. This had to be carried out for five years before the applicant could apply for a patent. If one of these elements was missing the patent would be denied and the land was now open again for claiming. The denied claimant could not re-file as he had failed to comply. All the roads, including the fence line, were public roads, sixty feet wide until the patent was issued. At that time the claim became private, except for the roads, as the title for the roads had passed from the Federal government to the public as they were traveled. The patent receives an easement to graze the public road or to adjust its alignment to relieve tillable ground, but it can not be removed from the property or placed in such a location as to render it impassable. The property I own has two public roads and a pack trail passing through it, gated at each fence line. The trail has not been used for over one hundred years, one of the roads for over fifty years. Some trees have grown in places and brush in others but they are public and require no maintenance. They cannot be bought or sold as that title was removed as they were traveled. A judge rules upon two narratives, one presented from each side. The judge may probe each side with questions that may reveal the law or some facets of the law. When each side closes there arguments the Judge takes their exhibits and the oral arguments into closed chambers and with his or her law clerk reasons which is the closest to the law. The Judge should rule in that direction
rs 2477
chip westbrook
chip westbrook
Jun 12, 2009 05:53 PM
You should have read your history book. Socialism began in the1830's to 1840's. Marco Polo lived from 1254 to 1324. Your land was granted as a patent from the Federal government, an instrument of ‘We the people’ to the original claim holder. That claim holder had to perform required tasks. First, he or she had to travel to the location. That path taken was set aside as traversed, sixty feet wide, by removing the federal title, leaving only the public’s title which is all inclusive of the United States and it’s Territories. Next, the claimant was required to fence the boundary to identify the area claimed. Then a liveable structure had to be built in which the claimant was required to inhabit. Then the land had to be improved through agricultural means. This had to be carried out for five years before the applicant could apply for a patent. If one of these elements was missing the patent would be denied and the land was now open again for claiming. The denied claimant could not re-file as he had failed to comply. All the roads, including the fence line, were public roads, sixty feet wide until the patent was issued. At that time the claim became private, except for the roads, as the title for the roads had passed from the Federal government to the public as they were traveled. The patent receives an easement to graze the public road or to adjust its alignment to relieve tillable ground, but it can not be removed from the property or placed in such a location as to render it impassable. The property I own has two public roads and a pack trail passing through it, gated at each fence line. The trail has not been used for over one hundred years, one of the roads for over fifty years. Some trees have grown in places and brush in others but they are public and require no maintenance. They cannot be bought or sold as that title was removed as they were traveled. A judge rules upon two narratives, one presented from each side. The judge may probe each side with questions that may reveal the law or some facets of the law. When each side closes there arguments the Judge takes their exhibits and the oral arguments into closed chambers and with his or her law clerk reasons which is the closest to the law. The Judge should rule in that direction