Memorandum for Discharge for Property Taxes

Ignorance of the law is not an excuse, especially by those that are in a position to have a superior
knowledge and access to the LAW.

Regardless of what advice you have been given, the UCC does fully apply within all areas of the
State of Oregon including every county and municipality.

As you may (or should) know, U.S., Inc. declared bankruptcy March 9, 1933, and all the States
signed on to this “National Emergency” and therein pledging all the property of the people to
support the emergency. This can be verified in Senate report #93-549 93rd Congress, 1st Session
(1973), “Summary of Emergency Powers Statutes,” Executive Orders 6073. 6102, 6111, and 6260
March 9, 1933, under Trading with the Enemy Act (65th Congress, session I, Chapter 105, 106,
Oct 6 1917), and further codified at 12 U.S.C.A. 95(a) and (B) as amended.

By the actions of HRJ-192, the Sovereigns (Natural born man and woman) of the United States of
America (Not the 14th amendment person/citizen/US Citizen) is the creditor to all government
whereas all government is the debtor to the Sovereign.

Unless you can PROOVE otherwise, contrary to HRJ-192 codified, your denial of MY
remedy as provided by Law is a direct violation of your oath of office to support and obey
the State of OREGON and the U.S. Constitutions. This constitutes a fiduciary injury to this
sovereign man if not corrected immediately. This one does not desire to harm another, but
this one will protect the rights allowed by HRJ-192 codified as that remedy was specifically
offered to the sovereign men and women for taking away all lawful money: Constitutional
money backed by gold and silver.

U.S., Inc. removed the gold from backing the “U.S. Notes” and over time, in its place, caused to
put into circulation “Federal Reserve Notes” to circulate AS money. These Federal Reserve Notes
are private credit “DEBT NOTES.” not constitutional money.

Blacks 5th edition: Federal Reserve Notes… Form of currency issued by Federal Reserve
Banks in the likeness of noninterest bearing promissory note payable to bearer on demand.
The Federal Reserve note is the most widely used paper currency. Such have replaced
silver and cold certificates which were backed by silver and gold. Such reserve (IOU)
notes are DIRECT OBLIGATIONS of the United States.

‘A Note’ is only a promise to pay. Fedility Savings v. Grimes, 131 P2d 894

Also transactions to discharge a debt liability is in accordance and compliance with UCC-104;
TITLE iv, Sec 401 (FRA); USC Title 12; USC Title 28 §1631, 3002; and the Foreign Sovereign
Immunity Act under necessity.

The Federal Reserve Bank as stated; “In the United States neither paper currency nor deposits have
value as commodities. Intrinsically, a dollar bill is just a piece of paper; deposits (are) merely book
entries.”─ MODERN MONEY MECHANICS, A Workbook on Bank Reserves and Deposit
Expansion. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, page 3. (FRN = Federal Reserve Notes)

As such, Federal Reserve Notes are nothing more than a 'debt' instrument (IOU) and
EXCHANGING debt instruments one for another cannot pay off a debt! You may correct me if I
am wrong!

So what you are doing is that you are demanding payment of a specific debt instrument (FRN’s…)
in exchange for another debt instrument (an IOU for an IOU).

However, since the U.S. Bankruptcy, there is no lawful constitutional money in circulation in
which to pay debts at law. And since U.S., Inc. and its federal unit 'corporations (States) followed
suit, all are under a state of insolvency and the UCC is the 'federal common law' that obviously
operates upon the Josephine County Treasury! Otherwise, you are required to prove and validate
that the 'money of account' as received by Josephine County Treasury is constitutional money back
buy substance, i.e.; gold or silver… can you do that?

The State of Oregon and all of its 'officers' and those who took their 'oath of office' are breaking
their oath and most likely committing fraud against the U.S. Constitution at Article 1, Section X
and the State Constitution (Oregon Constitution, Article 11 Section 1). In fact pursuant to the 'Pari
materia Rule,' as found in the Oregon constitution, no bank or bank institution can put into
circulation any bill, check, certificate, promissory note or other paper of any bank... to circulate as
money.” Therefore based upon the Oregon Constitution, Money does not circulate or exist; only
private credit in the form of Federal Reserve Bank Notes.

Page 1 of 4
This discussion is not about the idea that no Lawful Money exists but rather that because only
Private Fiat currency exists, the remedy provided is the discharge of debt for which this one is
proceeding with as per law. Codified HRJ-192 and all associated executive orders as well as
associated UCC, USC, and others statutes, court cases and code not specifically mentioned by
reference.

I am sure that you are well aware of the fact that the NAME; GARY DEAN DARBY is an
entity/trust/ESTATE, as registered in IRS's Puerto Rico Trust # 62 and has been assigned a
'taxable Activity Code' indicating that this 'entity' is offshore and engaged in some sort of
commercial business, on paper, for the sole express purpose of somewhat fraudulent taxation, from
the stand point that most if not all Americans have no idea of such matters or scam. You may
certainly correct me on this point if I am wrong!

Public Law 89-719 provides for the “discharge” of debts and obligations with commercial paper
(negotiable instruments; promissory notes, bills of exchange, bonds, debt/Bill 'Presentments'
converted to 'money orders' and FRN's … though the FRN is a debt instrument, the others are
'credit' instruments.

Public Law 89-719 further mandated that all governments and their agencies whether state,
county, city, town are compelled to do business with the inhabitants in strict conformity with
the protocol in the Uniform Commercial Code. This is expressed in the “Clearfield Doctrine”
which is “Stare decisis” (Blacks Law 5th edition) that eliminated government sovereignty and
reduced all acts of government and their agency/sub-corporations to be on the same ground as
anyone else when doing business with commercial paper instruments.

U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (2002) › PART 6. DISCHARGE AND

PAYMENT ›

§ 3-602. PAYMENT.

(a) Subject to subsection (b), an instrument is paid to the extent payment is made (i) by or on
behalf of a party obliged to pay the instrument, and (ii) to a person entitled to enforce the
instrument. To the extent of the payment, the obligation of the party obliged to pay the instrument
is discharged even though payment is made with knowledge of a claim to the instrument under
Section 3-306 by another person.

§ 3-603. TENDER OF PAYMENT.

(b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to

enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amount of
the tender, of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with
respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.

In the Oregon Revised Statutes:

ORS 81.010 "Effect of unaccepted offer in writing to pay or deliver. An offer in writing to pay a
particular sum of money or to deliver a written instrument or specific personal property is, if not
accepted, equivalent to the actual production and tender of the money, instrument or property."
(the latter here operates via the rule of Para Materia in Tennessee.)

ORS § 81.030 Receipt for paying money or delivering instruments or property Whoever pays
money or delivers an instrument or property is entitled to a receipt therefor from the person to
whom the payment or delivery is made, and may demand a proper signature to such receipt as a
condition of the payment or delivery.

The discharge of debt in this way has been tested in the “UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT” of NORTH CAROLINA, ASHEVILLE DIVISION:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VS. KATHY RAY WAHLER, EDWARD WILLIAM

WAHLER, and LEWIS VINCENT HUGHES; Docket#1:08CR55-RLV, 24 NOVEMBER, 2009.
(Case 1:08-cr-00055-RLV-DCK Document 166 Filed 11/24/09).

FEDERAL court decisions supersede and over-rides any lower state court decisions.

Twice now, tenders of payment/discharge have been submitted to the Josephine County Treasury
for the discharge of land taxes… Both times the tender was accepted, not returned, yet, not
credited to the specific account for which the discharge was assigned. This constitutes as unlawful
enrichment… Is this not fraud? Are you then in violation of Oregon Law ORS 81.010? An offer in
writing to pay a particular sum of money or to deliver a written instrument or specific personal
property is, if not accepted,[is] equivalent to the actual production and tender of money,

Page 2 of 4
instrument or property. Again, is this not Fraud, providing a fiduciary injury to the offering
party/claimant that allows for a claim against ones bond for damages?

If I have tendered to you the 'Tax Bill /presentment/Offer' 'accepted for value' laid upon the
property of the entity/estate and it being duly autographed (signed) by me being the
appropriate credit as payment and not being refused, then the so-called 'taxes' have been
discharged according to commercial law and OREGON Law allowing you to do your duty
AND close/zero the account. In this manner the Uniform Commercial code does operate within
the State of OREGON. If the tender was sent back with request for payment be made in FRN's,
please note that the UCC defines money as; “... other than legal tender notes.” To Date,
Josephine County Treasury has accepted all presentments and has not returned or rejected any; so
it is a moot point at this time. You may certainly correct me on this point if I am wrong!

Otherwise upon your dishonor and/or default BY REMAINING IN SILANCE, you and your
superiors will have therefore agreed to the PRESUMPTIONS of the points raised herein to be true
and correct on all issues and that whatever was tendered as payment was accepted by Josephine
County Treasury by operation of commercial law and the so-called tax debt has been discharged
and showing a balance of '0' with an expectation that I will be receiving a receipt of the same.

References and Cases:

Money is property. Federal Reserve notes are liabilities, not assets. Cash, according to the book.
See: “The Federal Reserve Bank; Its Purposes and Functions,” is coin.

The precious metals alone are money, and whatever else is to perform the functions of money
must be their representative and capable of being turned into them at will. So long as bank paper
retains this quality it is a substitute for money; divested of this, nothing can give it that character.
See: 3 Websters Works 41; Woodruff v. Miss, 162 US Reports 307.

A Note is only promise to pay. See: Fidelity Savings v. Grimes, 131 P 2d 894.

Legal tender notes are not good as lawful money of the U.S.. See: Rains v. State, 226
S.W. 189.

Checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money of the U.S. See:
State v. Nealan, 43 Ore 158.

Where the Fed. Gov. is a party to commercial paper, it is bound by same rules which govern
private persons. See: Continental American Bank v. U.S., C.C.A. La. (1947) 161F.2d 93.

The government assumes all responsibilities of private persons when it issues commercial paper.
See: U.S. v. First National Bank, 138 F.2d 681.

Federal Reserve Notes are a first and paramount lien on all the assets of the issuing
Federal Reserve bank. See: Moody’s Bank & Financial Manual, page 2105.

U.S. Currency does not contain all of essence of negotiable instrument under
Louisiana law. U.S. currency is the object for which negotiable instruments issue. The
very first requirement of our negotiable instrument law is that the instrument be signed by
the maker. The signatures on paper money are made by facsimile stamp put there by
machine. See: Civil Code Art. 2139 La; 120 So. 2d 845.

Federal Reserve Notes, as stated by the Federal Reserve Bank states; “In the United States neither
paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities. Intrinsically, a dollar bill is just a piece of
paper, deposits merely book entries…” – Modern Money Mechanics – Federal Reserve Bank of
Chicago – page 3 – Revised 6-1992; and B.), and as stated by the IRS;

Federal Reserve Notes are not legal money. See: Jerome Daly v. First National Bankof
Montgomery, Minn. Justice Martin v. Mahoney, Credit River Township, December 7-9. 1968.
Ruled that Federal Reserve notes were fiat money and not legal tender.

Federal Reserve Notes are valueless. (See IRS Codes Section 1.1001-1 (4657) C.C.H.)

"...Negotiable Instruments via Guaranty Trust of New York vs. Henwood, et al 59 S CT 847
(1933), 307 U.S. 847 (1939), FN3 NOS 384, 485 holds that 31 U.S.C. 5118 was enacted to remedy
the specific evil of tying debt to any particular currency or requiring payment in a grater number of
dollars than promised.

In light of the holding of Fidelity Bank Guarantee vs. Henwood, 307 U.S. 847 (1939), take notice
of... "As of October 27, 1977, legal tender for discharge of debt is no longer required. That is
because legal tender is not in circulation at par with promises to pay credit. There can be no

Page 3 of 4
requirement of repayment in legal tender either, since legal tender was not loaned [nor in
circulation] and repayment [or payment] need only be made in equivalent kind; A negotiable
instrument."

In light of the holding of Fidelity Bank Guarantee vs. Henwood, 307 U.S. 847 (1939), a Federal
US court of appeals ruled on Title 31 USC 5118. As of October 27, 1977, legal tender for
discharge of debt is no longer required. That is because legal tender is not in circulation at par
with promises to pay credit. Requirement of repayment of debt is against Public Policy, since legal
tender was not loaned [nor in circulation] they can not demand payment in any [particular]
form of coin or currency or legal tender and repayment [or payment] need only be made in
equivalent kind; A negotiable instrument.

The UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) defines a negotiable instrument as an unconditioned

writing that promises or orders the payment of a fixed amount of money. To be considered
negotiable an instrument must meet the requirements stated in Article 3.

U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS § 3-104. NEGOTIABLE

INSTRUMENT.
(a)"negotiable instrument" means an unconditional promise or order to pay a fixed amount of
money
(b) "Instrument" means a negotiable instrument.
(f) An instrument may be a check even though it is described on its face by another term, such as
"money order."

"SILENCE constitutes fraud when there is a duty to speak."

US v. Twell, 550 F2d 297, 299-300.

The Supreme Court in the case of Wills vs. Michigan State Police, 105 L. Ed. 2d 45 (1989) . . . made it perfectly
clear that (I) the Sovereign, cannot be named in any statute as merely a "person" or "any person"! "...at the
Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are
sovereigns without subjects... with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow
citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455
@DALL 1793 pp471-472

The United States went "Bankrupt" in 1933 and was declared so by President Roosevelt by Executive
Orders 6073, 6102, 6111 and by Executive Order 6260 on March 9, 1933 (See: Senate Report 93-549, pgs.
187 & 594), under the "Trading with the Enemy Act" (Sixty-Fifth Congress, Sess. I, Chs. 105, 106, October 6,
1917), and as codified at 12 U.S.C.A. 95a. On May 23, 1933, Congressman, Louis T. McFadden, brought formal
charges against the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank system, the Comptroller of the Currency and
the Secretary of the United States Treasury for criminal acts. The petition for Articles of Impeachment was
thereafter referred to the Judiciary Committee, and has yet to be acted upon. (See: Congressional Record, pp.
4055-4058) Congress confirmed the Bankruptcy on June 5, 1933, and impaired the obligations and considerations
of contracts through the "Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard And Abrogate The Gold Clause, June 5,
1933", (See: House Joint Resolution 192, 73rd Congress, 1st Session) The several States of the Union pledged the
faith and credit thereof to the aid of the National Government, and formed numerous socialist committees, such as
the "Council Of State Governments..."

Page 4 of 4