George and Marion House's “Reliance” on Benson (1985)
By: Bill E. Branscum
Copyrights 2003

On March 7, 1985, George and Marion House were indicted on seven counts of tax evasion in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201, and seven counts of failure to file income tax returns in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203. A review of the decision rendered by the United States District Court For The Western District Of Michigan, may be enough to dispositively resolve even the most obtuse Client’s questions and reservations.

On April 12, 1985, George and Marion House filed a motion to dismiss the indictment claiming that the Sixteenth Amendment which grants Congress the power to lay taxes was never properly ratified, and that as a result, all laws that have been passed pursuant to the authority granted by the Sixteenth Amendment are null and void.

On Saturday, May 25, 1985, a hearing was held in which George and Marion House introduced the testimony of William Benson, coauthor of the book, The Law That Never Was. Benson testified that he had researched the legislative history of the sixteenth amendment and had discovered that the Sixteenth Amendment was never properly ratified. In support thereof, the defendants introduced a voluminous collection of paperwork that Benson testified were certified documents he had obtained from the National Archives in Washington, D.C. and various states he visited during his research.

The Court certified that,

“The matter of the ratification of the sixteenth amendment as set forth by the defendants is one of first impression. It has never been before any appellate court of our nation.”

The Court cited a US Supreme Court case, Leser v. Garnett, 258 U.S. 130, 66 L. Ed. 505, 42 S. Ct. 217 (1922), involving an attempt to contest the ratification of a Constitutional Amendment in which the Supreme Court held:

“As the legislatures of Tennessee and of West Virginia had power to adopt the resolutions of ratification, official notice to the Secretary, duly authenticated, that they had done so was conclusive upon him, and, being certified to by his proclamation, is conclusive upon the courts.”

The Court went on to say,

“Because the sixteenth amendment was duly certified by the Secretary of State, because defendants have not alleged that the minor variations in capitalization, punctuation and wording of the various state resolutions are materially different in purpose or effect from the language of the congressional joint resolution proposing adoption of the sixteenth amendment, and because the sixteenth amendment has been recognized and acted upon since 1913, the Court rejects defendants' argument that the sixteenth amendment is not a part of the United States Constitution.”

On June 7, 1985, according to clear, unequivocal and undeniable public record, William J. Benson was given an opportunity to personally testify, and afforded an opportunity to personally produce and explain his documents and research. After hearing what Benson had to say, and in the face of all the documentary evidence that Benson personally presented and explained, the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan squarely addressed his facts, evidence and issues but found it non persuasive.

Nevertheless, William J. Benson continues to claim that no court has ever addressed his evidence.

Rather than expect your Clients to accept your word for it, you can let them read the Decision and Order for themselves. See Exhibit.

I welcome your comments, questions and suggestions.

© Copyright 2002 - Bill E. Branscum. All Rights Reserved.