Year: 1861



 general government is paramount in nothing.

 now propose to examine the matter little nor at large, and also the further point, whether tn people of the States, each in their separate ca pacity, possess absolute sovereign power for understand the whole tenor of his article to con vey this idea, that if the authority of the gener al government is paramount in nothing, then tn people of the States, each separately, are sover eign in all things. The two questions are neces sarily connected to such an extent that the ex animation of one, involves an examination c the other.

 If I can show that the States are not exclu sively sovereign, and that that sovereignty whicl is not in the States resides in the general gov ernmcnt, then shall have accomplished my pur pose. B talks about the sovereignty of th' States of sovereignty being " unalienable' &c as if it were not possible for the people, even in their national capacity, to divide the powers oi sovereignty, by granting part to general gov l crnment, and keeping part to be exercised through the agency of the States. He would even go 50 far, as to claim, that Sovereign may not impose restrictions upon the exercise of SOY. ereign powers. Absolute alienation by the peo pie in a national capacity, Of sovereign power so as to be beyond the power of recall by them in the same capacity, may be an imposSibility but that the people in a national capacity, may crputa q s,,nrnmo national rovorpp,apt +l,t tho people of the States may separately alienate to that supreme national government certain of 1 their sovereign powers, 1 affirm as fundamen- :al truth. That the people of the United States in their national capacity, may impose restrc, tions upon the sovereign rights of the people of a State, also affirm as a truth, in its broatlest sense. base my claim upon what the people in their national capacity hare aheae1y cloue- The people of the United States, by supreme rule of action, by q supreme law, to be revoked by them only in the same high capaclty. have said, that the people of State do not possess absolute sovereign power, and sl!al! not exercise it. and as this prohil iton O the sovereign pow CT of the people of |. State cmenates from them in their national capacity, it Is conclusive to the extent of the prohibition imposed Ali power resides in the people. In a national character they rlay do what may sacM proper. If they see fit and proper to form national government and grant to it Supreme authority, they may Go so, and that government is sovereign to the cx- tent of the powers granted. So tie people of a State are soverci yn tu the extent of the rowtrs. exercised within the scope uf their authoriiy,-- sovereignty is divided, between the people n |, national point of view, and the people in a State point of view, because the powers or the author ity of the people, are divided in the same Way Some of the rights and powers of the people are national and some are local. or appertain exc!u- sivey to a State. Those powers which are na- tonal are exercised by the national government Those powers which apperan exclusively to d State, are exercised through the agency of the State. The powers of the general government are mostly limited by written Consti ution, and to the extent of the powers granted, to the extent of the authority it may exercise it is sov- ereign, as much so as are the States, as separate States. The States are sovereign only to the extent of the powers it may exercise. If it may not exercise exclusive sovereign power, it is rot exclusively sovereign. So far as the sovereign ty of the people of q State is abridged, so far is it not sovereign. Their sovereignty is isregulated by the powers they may exercise. So with the general government. So far as it exercises sov- 1 cregn power, so far are the States not sovereign The constitution of the United States IS the su- preme law of the national sovereignty. It is the supreme law by which the national sovereignty is regulated and governed. The people of the mutton, in their high national capacity, have so ordained.

 Not content with this, and not content with declaring that the Constitution they made should be supreme law, they went further and provided that the laws made, by the general government, should also be supreme, the sovcr eighty of the people of the States to the contra ry. The people of the nation by this one act have demolished the whole argument of $ B. by granting to the government the power to make laws, which they declared should be supreme If then the general government possess supreme legislative power is it not idle to talk about tho government not possessing sovereign power 2 Is that provision of the Constitution nugatory because it invests the laws of Congress with soy ereign efficacy? The people were not ignoran of the nature and extent of the powers they granted Why did they prohibit the people O the States from exercising certain high sover eign powers? And why did they grant to tho general government the right and power to exer c'se those rights, which they prohibited to tht . peopie ot the States? If those powers whict

 the people of the States were prohibited iron eAefc'sl"g' would have been sovereign if exercis

 ed by them, are they less sovereign becausa ox

 erclsed by the general government? The DOW

 CTS exercised by the general government. are ex ercised independent of the people of the States because the grant is absolute to the governmen, and the powers absolute in the government ap a supreme power is gioen to the governmen

 over them, which would not be the case, if tn

 people of State had a co-equal power with tn government over the same powers.

 The right of the people of State, to G

 equal use of the powers granted to the gener'

 government would as matter of course destro that supreme character which is given to tn lgOyernment and pive fo the neonle of A State