The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-05-26
CONGRESSMAN CLAYTON
 ADDRESSES THE ALUMNI

| ton Of the union and the maintenance of the federal government. The constitution in all of its provisions looks to an inde- structible union of indestructble states. .
 Let us remember that the American revolution would never have been begun or. if it had Deen begun. would have l ended fin failure. if the people of the l colonies had believed that, in the event they succeeded in gaining independence l from the British crown, there would be l established over them the supreme con l trol of an unlimited centralized govern ment. from which they might suffer op- 1 pression similar to that which had in- cited them to revolution. The wisdom of l forming the more perfect union was doubted by many of the statesmen of that day who had aided in achieving in dependence Notable among them were Samuel Adams. George Mason. Richard Henry Lee, and Patrick Henry. It was 1 Henry who was the first to rouse col- onies against British oppression by his immortal speech at Williamsburg voieing the spirit of the revolution in a sublime sentiment expressed in the burning words destined never to become commonplace or tame. It is recorded that these pa triots whose illustrious names I have called although chosen as delegates. de- cliued to participate in the constitutional convention because they doubted the wis dom of the movement and feared that the formation of the union would initiate at least against the rights of the states and the liberty of the citizens of the states.
 Centralized Government.
 And the anxiety with which the people of the states sought to safeguard their rights and protect themselves against strong centralized government is fur ther evinced by the unwillingness of the states to ratify the constitution because it did not contain bill of rights. It was agreed and understood that as soon as the constitution became effective a bill of rights in nature and in the form of the first ten amendments to the con- stitution should be submitted for ratih- cation This was done, and they were ratified. These ten amendments were called the bill of rights. The first eight were no more than an enumeration of popular rights that existed under the inherited common law of England and preserved by each state, and the only purpose of their adoption was to repose restraint upon the government of the United States against the violation of these. And because certain rights were set forth in these amendments it was thought necessary to avoid the rule of construction that where power or au- thority Is specifically conferred in the in- strument 1t was not to be construed to grant other power or authority by impli- cation; therefore the ninth amendment 
 construction for the guidance of the courts and statesmen, namely, that the enumeration in the constitution of oer- tain rights should not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people
 From the very nature of the constitu- ton the powers not granted away by the states were reserved to the states. But the people and the states were jealous Of power, and hence, unnecessarily and ex industria, the tenth amendment was adopted declaring that the powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution and not prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states re- spectively or to the people.
 The ninth and tenth amendments 1t was said by the supreme court of the United States, were "adopted with pre- science" and under fear that the na- tional government might. under the press ure of a supposed general welfare, at tempt to exercise powers which had not been granted"
 Additional Evidence.
 Additional evidence of the jealousy of the people of the sovereignty of the states in all cases except where powers were granted away to the federal gov ernment, essential to its existence and operation. was the adoption of the elev- enth amendment to prevent the judicial power of the United States being used in any suit against any state by citizens of another state or by any foreigner.
 From all this 1t will be seen that Glad stones familiar tribute to the constitu- ton was inaccurate, in that the consti- tuition was not the result of any one stroke or the fruit of a limited time.
 The fundamental principles and the plan of our constitutional government were not a creation. They were the re- suit and expression, when incorporated into the constitution. of a growth origi- mating with Anglo-Saxon civilization. More than quarter of a century be- general plan was in flower, when Mon- tesquieu wrote his Spirit of the Laws, setting forth the beauty of a govern ment divided into the three coordinate departments, legislative, executive and judicial. The principles of such a scheme and most of the characteristic features of such government without the linn itations upon the federal government were in operation in several of the Amer ican states before the federal constitution was framed. The framers gathered the fruit of ages, and in their capacity as delegates from the states presented to the states the organic laws of the union, impossible to be vitalized except by the approval of the states. The novel fea- ture, if it was novel, of the federal plan was the recognition of the division of the powers of government between the gen. eral government and the more numerous state governments. The complex rela- ton between the federal government and the states, respectively, has always been of the greatest concern, and out of this relation spring all the perplexing ques- - ---------