The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-12-19

course. the controversy hinges on the inquiry:
who were the contracting parties TO tho forma-.
tion of the United Statesi II isMr. Powslrs
opinion that, Notwithstanding webster's In.
Ronious argument hat the people. as q whole.
created the nation, 1t still remains true that,
IA doing 10, tho several sections Of the PEG.
Mo acted in their separate organic capaci-
tics as States. 1t Is true. Of course, that the
Constitution opens with the preamble: "We,
the pcople Of the United States, In order to form
n more perfect Union. establish Justice. insure
domestic tranquility, provide for the common de-
fence, promote tho general welfare, and secure
tho blessings Of liberty to ourselves and our
poeterlty, do ordain and establish this Constitu.
ton for the United States Of America" On the
other hand, the instrument closes with Article
VII, which IL, "The ratification OF the conven-
lions Of nino States shall DO sufficient for the
establishment OF this Constitution between the
States SO r~atifying the same" Washington sot
his name after the words. "Done in convention
by the unanimous consent Of the States pres
emit" In the constitutional Convention tho
voting was by States. each State having ono
vote. Article X. Of the Amendments to tho
Constitution. proposed By the Congress Of 1889.
and adopted two years later. reads: Tho pow
ers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by It to the States,
are reserved to tho States respectively, or to
the people," II is obviously open to question
whether the words States and people In this
clause are used as synonyms or as distinguish
ing some reserve powers as belonging to the
people not considered organically.
Hero Mr.. Powell recurs to certain facts at
which he had already glanced In his introduo-
tory chapter. He there pointed out that, had
the events Of the first ten years OF national life
been foreseen, 1t is certain that Virginia and
New York. with North Carolina and probably
Pennsylvania would not have ratified the Con-
stitution. 1t is, as he afterward undertakes to
provo In the third and fifth chapters OF this
volume. equally certain that, could New Eng
land have looked far enough ahead to see
the events OF the fourteen years following 1900.
It would never have entered tho Union. In tho
second chapter Mr.. Powell directs our attention
to the fact that the Constitution. II It had been
passed upon by the people directly. would
not have been adopted. Concei ming this
point, he quotes Chief Justice Marshall,
himself a strong Federalist, who al.
lows that 80 small in many instances was the
majority for the Constitution az to afford strong
ground for the opinion that. had tho influence
Of character been removed, tho intrinsic merits
of tho instrument would not have secured its
adoption. Indeed. It 10 scarcely to DO doubted
that, In some Of the States, o majority of tho
people were in opposition" In our authors
Judgment. therefore. 1t is q case Of supprcssto
c@J tN@s nav pSeltoV WIN ho SOhlI I'll
parties in constituting the nation. when It 10 ad-
mitted that, II they had voted directly on the
Constitution, It would not have been adopted.
1t was the people, acting as States, and in that
capacity only. that constructed tho Federal
Union. We have already seen that, in tho rati-
flying act passed by the State of New York.
tho assertion was made that "The powers of
government may be reassumed by the people
whatsoever 1t shall become necessary to their
| hannipaaab Vtrr;p;, ,a;l thok a. MI ---.--
granted under the Constitution, being derived
from the people OF the United States, mny be re-
sumed by them whatsoever the same shall DO
perverted to their injury or oppression; and
every power not granted thereby remains with
them. and at their will" This seems to imply
n right OF the States not only to nuilify an act
OF Congress. but to withdraw from the Union.
The cndeavors of John Marshall and Daniel
Webster to draw a distinction between "the
people" and "the State" lead the author of
this volume to examine another chapter
Of our history. He recalls that the con.
vention Of New Jersey, ratifying tho Con-
s%titution, said, Whereas the Legislature
OF this State did pass IN act to authorize the
people OF the State to meet In convention, DELHI
crate upon. auree to. and ratify the Constitution
of the United States. we. the delegates Of tho
State OF New Jersey. do hereby ratify," &c.
Connecticut said in convention: we the dele
gates OF the people OF the said State, pursuant
to an act OF the Legislature. do ratify," &c.
Virginia mot !" in pursuance OF a recommends.
ton OF the General Assembly" Her convention
not only ratified the Constitution as 1t was, but
recommended an amendment that each State
In the Union shall respectively retain every
power. jurisdiction. and right which is not, by
this Constitution, delegated to tho Congress Of
the United States"
Mr.. Powells view is that tho abstract distino-
ton between "the people" and Z" State govern.
ments" was hatchcd by the fertile brain of
Federalism. and he points out that tho doctrine
never took shape AS a general principle until it
was formulated by Daniel Webster in his de.
bate with Hayne in 1882. Webster then laid
down the Fundamental principle that the Consti.
tuition Ia not a compact between the component
States Of the Union In their sovereign capacities,
but q government proper. founded on tho adop.
ton of the people and creating direct relations
between itself and individuals. Webster him.
self, however, had said. In his reply 10 Foote. In
1880: Il am resolved not to submit In silence
to accusations which impute to us a DISPOSE.
ton to evade the constitutional compact"
John Quincy Adams's impatient comment was
that the Union Is both OF tho people and
Of the States, and all constitutional govern
ment 10 q compact" Calhoun quoted Webster
against himself with great force. The latter
thereupon modified his position to " the Consti.
tuition rests ON compact, and Is no longer a COM
pact; for. II 1t DO n compact, states may secede."
The author OF this book finds In the history Of
the ratifying conventions further evidences that
the Government was originally considered to DO
q compact OF sovereign States. In the Massa.
chusetts convention Fisher Ames argued that
the Senators represent the sovereignty of tho
States" John Sumner added Tho general
Government depends on the State governmental
for Its worry existence;' and Judge Parsons de-
clared tho Government Is the nero result of a
compact" And again: THE resolutions of rat.
ifcation denne the Constitution as q solemn
compact" The same understanding 10 def
aitely Incorporated in the discussions and rati-
flying resolutions OF other States. To Mr.. Pow.
ell no fact seems moro certain than that tho
Constitution would never have been accepted
on any other basis. lie foresoes. moreover. a
great danger In drawing the Wobsterian dis.
Linction between the State and the peopls,
For. II tho people can uct upon Federal adairs