Many people have expressed doubt and confusion as to how a contract can be entered into without an express agreement by both parties, and/or the contract being physically signed by all parties to the contract. This is usually the reaction when faced with the fact that all of us are in various invisible contracts (from the invisible contract of citizenship to the invisible contract of operating under the Law Merchant body of laws and customs); not to mention the fact that we enter into various other contracts not realizing we have done so. To understand how this is possible, and to understand not only how to avoid entering into such contracts in the future, but to understand how these principles may be employed to our advantage, we must necessarily explore the case for Tacit Procuration.
Tacit Procuration is the principle of obtaining something (i.e. agreement) through means which are implied or indicated, but not actually expressed. (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 10th Ed., pg. 1199; 930) Other terms that have also been used to express this principle are Tacit Acquiescence, based on the root acquiesce meaning to accept, comply, or submit tacitly or passively (id, pg. 1O); and “agreement through silence”. In essence, all of these terms refer to the same res or thing: evidence of ones agreement by and through their silence.
Where much of the confusion surrounding Tacit Procuration comes from is when the principle of Tacit Procuration can and can not be applied. Where many lose sight of this principle is when they attempt to apply the principle of Tacit Procuration to conduct that is not contractual or contract related. This confusion is more evident, however, when one looks to the structure of society, government, and the world as a whole. This is so because the systems of government today have been slowly and quietly moved into a system of hidden contracts. Meaning that, with few exceptions, all intercourse comes under one or more contracts, though this has not been openly declared, only merely suggested.
There is a body of law called tort, which in simplified terms means injury incurred outside of a contract, which may come into play occasionally. Though, if we look at the various invisible contracts in place today, we can see this body of law becoming less and less applicable. Mr. Shrout uses the example of getting struck in the nose to illustrate when the act is contractual and when it may be a tort action. As he explains, if one is a wrestler, and has entered into a contract, the act of getting struck in the nose will likely come under the terms of the contract. However, if you are walking down the street and someone strikes you in the nose, this would come under tort law as there was no contract.
My personal view after researching and pondering this subject at length is that even when one is struck in the nose, this will be covered by various invisible contracts, including the citizenship contract. By considering the elements of a contract, and comparing these to statutes, we can easily see that statutes and codes are themselves contracts.
Consider the example of the funds held by the Victim’s Compensation and Government Claims Board of California. (Cal. P. C. §2085.5)1 When considered fully, one can see this is a good example of Tacit Procuration in effect. If the state, acting as fiduciary for the victim of a crime, collects the restitutions from the various people who are convicted of committing the crime (id), and the victim of that crime does not claim the funds being held, the state claims the funds. (Cal. P. C. §2085.5(k)(2-3)) How does the state legally retain the funds and convert them over for the state’s use? This is accomplished by Tacit Procuration. The state’s code sets the terms of the contract. In simplified terms, the state agrees to act in the role of debt collector and will advance funds to the other party upon request. In exchange for the state acting as the debt collector, should the other party fail to make a claim within the time set by the statute (contract), the parties· agree that the state may transfer the restitution funds collected from the party convicted of the crime into its own General Fund and use the funds for their own benefit. The Tacit Procuration by the victim of the crime is evidenced by the failure to file one’s claim in the proscribed time.
The principles of Tacit Procuration are expressed in the following maxims oflaw:2 “He who does not deny, admits”
“He who can and does not forbid that which is done on his behalf, is deemed to have bidden it.” (Civil Code §3519)
“That which ought to have been done is to be regarded as done, in favor of him to whom, and against him from whom, performance is due.” (Civil Code §3529)
“He who takes the benefit must bear the burden.” (Civil Code §3521)
Read the entire 18 page report