The Patriot Threat

Eleven days ago this office forwarded to the Secretary of State a detailed memorandum concerning problems noted with the ratification process for the 16th Amendment. I will not reiterate what was stated therein, except to question why no action was taken relative to its contents. It seems that something more than silence is warranted, given the serious legal questions raised (which was why the example from Kentucky was included). Yet instead of a further investigation, the Secretary of State has now requested legal clarification as to his powers relative to declaring a constitutional amendment ratified. The Supreme Court has never directly considered this precise issue, but it has ruled in Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649 (1892), that What the president was required to do was simply in execution of the act of Congress. It was not the making of law. He was the mere agent of the law-making department to ascertain and declare the event upon which its expressed will was to take effect.

 

The same principle is true of the Secretary of State, relative to declaring a proposed amendment to the Constitution ratified. Congress has delegated to him the authority to declare the “expressed will” of the states relative to any proposed amendment. The Secretary of State is the sole administrative official who can make that legal determination. How that is done by the Secretary is for him alone to decide. History is instructive, though. As to all other constitutional amendments previously approved (and disapproved) since 1787, in every instance the Secretary of State declared that the requisite number of states had notified his office of their approval or disapproval. That declaration has never been questioned by any court.

 

Kim stopped reading.

 

Here was some proof that there were doubts, in 1913, about the validity of the 16th Amendment to America’s Constitution, just as Anan Wayne Howell had speculated. The amendment, he knew, was declared valid on—he checked Howell’s book—February 25, 1913, the day after the memo he held was sent from the solicitor general to the secretary of state. But as Howell noted in his book, that official action merely said the amendment was “in effect,” not “properly ratified.” A play on words, for sure, but an important one. Perhaps done by the secretary of state in response to the solicitor’s written concerns?

 

But what were those concerns?

 

The memorandum was silent on details, referring instead to another document dated eleven days earlier. He rummaged through the remaining pages and found no copy of that communication. But he did find a report, from the secretary of Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, to the president of the United States, dated January 26, 1937. This, too, had been referred to in Howell’s book.

 

More unsubstantiated fact there.

 

Now here it was.

 

Per your presidential order, the one dollar bill was redesigned in 1935. The changes incorporated at that time were as follows: On the obverse, the blue numeral 1 was changed to gray and made smaller; the gray ONE to the right was removed; the Treasury seal was made smaller and superimposed by WASHINGTON, D.C.; and a stylized ONE DOLLAR was added over the Treasury seal. The reverse was also modified to include the Great Seal of the United States. Per your specific request (as noted on the next page) the seal was depicted with its reverse side to the left, obverse to the right.

 

He flipped to the next page and studied a copy of the bill’s image, noting that Roosevelt had both approved and specifically asked for the seal to be depicted as noted.

 

 

 

He turned his attention back to the memorandum, which explained that the reverse of the Great Seal of the United States, as it appeared on the redesigned $1 bill, featured a barren landscape dominated by an unfinished pyramid of thirteen steps, topped by the Eye of Providence. At the base of the pyramid were engraved the Roman numerals MDCCLXXVI, 1776. At the top stood a Latin phrase, ANNUIT COEPTIS, which meant “God favors our undertaking.” At the bottom of the seal was a semicircular banner that proclaimed NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, taken from Virgil, meaning “a new order of the ages,” a reference to the new American era. A string of thirteen pearls extended outward toward the bill’s edge.

 

The obverse of the Great Seal featured a bald eagle, the symbol of the United States. Above the eagle was a radiant cluster of thirteen stars arranged in a six-pointed star. The eagle’s breast was covered by a heraldic shield with thirteen stripes that resembled those on the American flag. The stars and stripes stood for the thirteen original states of the union. The eagle held a ribbon in its beak reading E PLURIBUS UNUM, “Out of many states, one nation.” In its left talons the eagle grasped thirteen arrows. In its right talons it held an olive branch with thirteen leaves and thirteen olives. Together, those represented the opposing powers of war and peace. Another string of thirteen pearls extended outward toward the bill’s edge.

 

Your question relative to a message hidden within the Great Seal was considered. The fact that drawing lines between letters A M S O N on the seal’s reverse side not only forms a six-pointed star, but also provides letters that form the word MASON cannot be explained. The Great Seal was created over a 23 year period, starting in 1776 and ending in 1789. Many designs were considered and rejected. Symbolism abounds throughout the seal, especially with the repeated use of 13 in much of its art. But all of that was intended to reflect a patriotic flavor, a celebration of the newly formed United States of America. No evidence could be found of any intentionally inserted secret messages.

 

The latest redesign of the one dollar bill occurred over a period from late 1933 to the end of 1934, per your order. Many career Treasury officials participated, most of whom were hired when Mellon was Treasury Secretary, but no influence from him on the redesign has been uncovered.

 

The remaining copies dealt with the 1935 redesign, the reasons and justifications given for each artistic inclusion. Nothing seemed particularly relevant. Then he came across another report.

 

More recent.

 

Dated in the last ninety days.

 

From Paul Larks to the current secretary of Treasury.

 

 

 

 

 

THIRTY-THREE