Drummond and Drummond Incorporators Of The Maine State Bar Association

Courtesy of Lise from Maine

Attorney Josiah H. Drummond and Attorney Josiah H. Drummond, Jr. are incorporators of the Maine State Bar Association.

Sixtieth Legislature of the State of Maine 1881, Josiah Drummond, click here.

Sixty-Fifth Legislature of the State of Maine 1891, Josiah Drummond, Jr., click here.

An Act to incorporate the Maine State Bar Association, click here.

No Excuses For The Law Firm of Drummond & Drummond’s Pattern Of Unethical Behavior, click here.

Advertisements
Published in: on February 13, 2014 at 12:47 am  Comments (8)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://unmasker4maine.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/drummond-and-drummond-incorporators-of-the-maine-state-bar-association/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

8 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Hi!

    The 1881 and 1891 “corporation” known as the Maine State Bar Association states in the actual laws that it can be sued and it can sue.

    How can it sue and how can the people sue when there aren’t any “county” courts, within and for the county (local control) left in operation here in Maine plus there aren’t any commissioned judges and no Jurors selected by the people since 1935?

    Is this not rather interesting to say the least?

    Was this to ensure that no one could sue so, therefore, this Maine State Bar Association was protected after all?

    Your thoughts?

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine

  2. Hi!

    Take particular notice of Charles F. Libby’s signature as President of the Senate in 1891.

    He was also one of the incorporators of the 1881 and 1891 Maine State Bar Associations.

    Is this not a conflict of interest?

    Is he allowed lawfully to unjustly enrich himself by using his public office as a Senator?

    No, he is not.

    He works for the people, and the people have a right to expect that all public officers abide by the duties of their public offices and follow the mandates of the original constitution.

    If you read the 100 years booklet of the said association on this forum, you will see that Charles F. Libby was a prominent leader regarding legal reforms to enhance himself and others.

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine

  3. Atty. Robert Hirshon from the law firm of Drummond & Drummond, who represented Coastal Bank in a fraudulent foreclosure, failed “to take “reasonable” actions” in the theft of the home of Marion Lafortune. Did he not check into the documented evidence? He apparently went along with the crooks. This law firm’s pattern of unethical behavior continues to exist today. They have been “enhancing” their law firm and themselves for years. Where is consumer protection in this state? Do legislators today work for the people? We may have found a handful of them. The others must realize they are being led by the nose by attorneys. If they don’t get – or don’t want to take time to get it – it’s time for them to go home!

  4. Good info!

  5. Hi!

    Now pay strict attention to another “incorporator” of the 1891 Maine State Bar Association, a private organization, Andrew P. Wiswell who was Speaker of the House of Representatives (see his signature on the actual law on this forum) in 1891.

    Is this not a conflict of interest?

    Can he use his public office to unjustly enrich himself and others?

    No, he cannot.

    Also, take notice that Governor Edwin C. Burleigh signed this fraudulent law.

    Did he ask the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court, the original one, a “question of law” regarding this pretend law (see Article VI, Section 3)?

    Apparently not since it passed.

    Did both Charles F. Libby and Andrew P. Wiswell ask a “question of law” to the said justices?

    Apparently not since they would both benefit from this supposed law.

    Why didn’t Governor Burleigh behave as a “rival” regarding this so-called law and call these guys “on the carpet?”

    Did Governor Burleigh “cooperate” with these two legislators?

    Appears that way, doesn’t it?

    The way to keep a free and just government of the people, by the people, and for the people is to “act” in a public office as a “rival” when fraud and treason are shown such as this pretend law and more.

    These legislators, the Governor and the Executive Council all had a “remedy” provided in the original constitution by the Founding Fathers (Article VI, Section 3) but did they use it?

    Apparently not!

    My little town sent Eliphaz Chapman, Esq. to the 1819 Constitutional Convention, and apparently he was a “learned” man. He, among others, didn’t want the public officers “stranded” without a remedy in the event that they lacked certain knowledge operating from their public offices.

    This remedy was not placed in the said constitution for nothing.

    On this forum there is a “question of law” made by Governor Burleigh regarding some other issue so he is “aware” of this remedy.

    Dottie, can you find this “question of law” (document that I sent you) made by the said Governor and place the link on this part of your blog so the people can see this for themselves and where it can be easily found?

    It is vital that the people make “connections” to the various issues otherwise there is a great potential to get lost.

    Your thoughts?

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine

  6. Hi!

    Furthermore, why didn’t some Counsellor-at-law (not attorney) with a client (one of the people) bring this issue into court to “test” the law?

    Did that happen?

    I think not.

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine

  7. Hi!

    Click on the link above to Governor Burleigh’s “question of law” in 1889 to the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court.

    Apparently, Governor Burleigh understood that he had a “remedy” in 1889 so why didn’t he use this remedy in 1891, too, regarding the fraudulent Maine State Bar Association pretend law?

    He signed this so-called law.

    So why didn’t he “leave it blank” to show that he opposed this supposed law?

    Who knows?

    Did Governor Burleigh commit fraud by signing this 1891 pretend law that is repugnant to the original constitution?

    Yes, of course!

    Your thoughts?

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: