rebellion. That is the only suspicious cir-
cumstance about these speeches; they so much
resemble the speeches delivered by those
worthies, professing identically the same de-
votion to the country. Davis is even said to
have left the chamber of the Senate of the
United States with tears in his eyes. I do
not know whether his conscience could have
smitten him; I reckon not. I think it likely
he thought the fare would not be so good
where he was going [laughter]—that proba-
bly had something lo do with his tears.
The gentlemen of the opposition have urged
that whether this doctrine of supreme and
paramount allegiance be true or false, the
Declaration of Rights is not the place to put
it, as that contains an enumeration of the
rights belonging to the people, and not the
powers wielded by the Government. At first
glance, that assertion seems to have some
plausibility about it. But I bold that the
people of Maryland are entitled to the privi-
lege of being citizens of the United States;
they have an equal interest with others in the
history of the past, and all the glory that
clusters about the name of American citizen ;
they have an equal interest in the flag of their
country. And if they have an equal interest
in those things, then they must owe allegiance
to the Government which is supreme.
Several gentlemen upon the other side have
rather triumphantly asked the question, if
the creature could be above the creator,
meaning that the State governments created
the Constitution and Government of the
United States. And they asked the question
with some show of triumph, if the Constitu-
tion of the United States could be greater
than the Constitution of the State, inasmuch
as the State governments were its creator.
To which I reply that the Constitution of the
United States, equally with the Constitutions
of the States, is the creature of the people, not
of the States. The people are master and su-
preme over both, and can alter either as they
see proper, and can transfer and locate pow-
ers in which they think proper; or can vest
their sovereign powers in any other form
they see proper.
Mr. MILLER. Will the gentleman from Ce-
cil (Mr. Scott) answer the question, whether
the majority of the people of the United States
can alter the Constitution of the United
States?
Mr. SCOTT. In the manner prescribed by
that instrument they can.
Mr. MILLER. They cannot do it; it is im-
possible.
Mr. SCOTT. They can do it in the manner
they have themselves prescribed. The peo-
ple of the United States formed the govern-
ments of the States and of the United States.
And according to the doctrine we all agree
upon, that the people are sovereign in this
country, then the people are not only mas-
ters of the State governments, but masters of |
the Government of the United States, and can
change either or both at their pleasure.
At first, during the operation of the arti-
cles of confederation, the sovereign power
was only partially lodged in the Government
of the United States. But that was evidently
so unfit for the purposes for which it was in-
tended, that the people formed a new govern-
ment, and enlarged and increased the powers
of that government by a direct grant of pow-
ers from the people. And in that grant they
enumerated, by expressly naming them, par-
ticular functions of sovereignty that they
wished that Government to enjoy and exer-
cise. Now take away from any sovereign in
Europe, the mightiest there, the powers and
functions enumerated in the Constitution of
the United States as being vested in the Gov-
ernment of the United States, and what a
sorry sovereign you would have; a sovereign
that could not raise an army; that could not
build a frigate; that could not make peace
or war; that could not send or receive an
ambassador; that could not coin money, or
regulate commercial intercourse; that is the
kind of sovereign he would be. The Gov-
ernment that holds and exercises these essen-
tial and important attributes of sovereignty,
must be the supreme power; and if so the
paramount allegiance of the citizen or subject
is due to that power. This divests the ques-
tion of all the difficulty in which the opposi-
tion seemed to suppose they had involved us,
in regard to the creature being above the
creator, as there is no attempt to put the
Government above the people, the people be-
ing supreme and above both State and Gen-
eral Governments.
The gentleman from Prince George's (Mr.
Belt) said that the people were sovereign.
Abstractly that is so; but pratically that is
not so; for allegiance is not due from one
man to another and back again. The mob
that desecrated the streets of Baltimore were
sovereign, in one sense, at that time; they
were masters fur the time. What I under-
stand by the sovereignty of the people, is
that particular manifestation of it which we
call government. Government consists of a
Constitution, laws made in pursuance thereto
and officers appointed to carry out the will
of the people, as manifested in that Constitu-
tion and those laws. That embodiment and
manifestation of the sovereignty of the peo-
ple is that to which allegiance is due. As
the Government of the United States holds
the most important powers—without which
there can be no sovereignty at all, without
which we would be the prey of every one
that saw fit to molest us—as the Government
of the United States holds all these important
powers, those that inhere in and necessarily
belong to sovereigns, to that Government un-
questionably must the paramount allegiance
of the citizen be due.
The people can withdraw these powers of |
