Congress or the States undertake to ratify it?
No, sir; Congress called another Convention
of the people in order to ratify the Constitu-
tion of the United States. Thus the Consti-
tution was formed by the people and ratified
by the people. It was ratified by the votes
of the people and not by the votes of the
States.
But it seems to me that the Constitution con-
tains within itself the internal evidence of its
own structure, of its own powers, sufficient
to warrant the insertion in the Declaration of
Rights of the provision we mean to insert
there. It says in one of its clauses :
"This Constitution and the laws of the Uni-
ted States which shall be made in pursuance
thereof, and all treaties made or which shall
be made under the authority of the United
States, shall be the supreme law of the land ;
and the judges in every State shall be bound
thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws
of any State to the contrary notwithstand-
ing."
Look also to the enumeration of the powers
of the Government of the United States and
see whether it accords with the idea of the
States being supreme. Congress has power
to lay and collect taxes, to borrow money, to
regulate commerce, to establish a uniform
rule of naturalization and uniform laws on
the subject of bankruptcies, to coin money,
to establish post-offices, to declare war, to
raise and support armies, to provide and
maintain a navy, to provide for calling forth
the militia to execute the laws of the Union,
suppress insurrections and repel invasions,
&c. In section 10 are prohibitions upon the
States:
"1. No State shall enter into any treaty,
alliance or confederation; grant letters of
marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills
of credit; make anything but gold and sil-
ver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass
any bill of attainder, ex post facto law or law
impairing the obligation of contracts; or
grant any title of nobility."
" 2. No State shall without the consent of
Congress lay any imposts or duties on imports
or exports except what may be absolutely
necessary for executing its inspection laws;
and the net produce of all duties and imposts
laid by any State on imports or exports shall
be for the use of the treasury of the United
States, and all such laws shall be subject to
the revision and control of Congress. No
State shall without the consent of Congress
lay any duty on tonnage, keep troops or ships
of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement
or compact with another State or with
a foreign power, or engage in war unless act-
ually invaded, or in such imminent danger
as will not admit of delay."
Is that consistent with the sovereignty of
the governments of the States, for the United
States to say what they may do and what
they may not? |
But that we may not be left in the dark
with regard to the sovereignty of the General
Government and of the States, we have the
decisions of the Supreme Court, which have
made the whole question so clear that the
wayfaring man, though a fool, cannot err.
in the case of McCullough vs. State of Mary-
land, in 4 Wheaton, 420, I was amused to
see bow the gentlemen have picked out a little
of it to sustain their doctrine, totally miscon-
struing it; whereas taken as a whole, it goes
to confute the doctrine of !State sovereignty.
Judge Marshall, looking at the question, asks
who was ever so big a fool as to suppose the
people of the United States were compounded
together in a mass; and the gentleman from
Anne Arundel (Mr. Miller) uses that to show
that the people did not and could not act to-
gether, but acted as States; whereas the ar-
gument of Judge Marshall knocks the propo-
sition from under him, and decides the case
flat-footed against him. I will tell you how
this question came up.
Congress had established a National Bank,
and there was in the State of Maryland a
branch bank, which the Legislature of Mary-
land attempted to tax. That tax was resisted;
and the question came up to the Supreme
Court whether the State had a right to tax a
bank chartered by the General Government.
Chief Justice Marshall reviews the authorities,
and here is what be says:
"It would be difficult to sustain this propo-
sition. The Convention which framed the
Constitution was, indeed, elected by the State
Legislatures. But the instrument, when it
came from their hands, was a mere proposal,
without obligation, or pretentious to it. It
was reported to the then existing Congress
of the United States, with the request that it
might ' be submitted to a Convention of del-
egates chosen in each State, by the people
thereof, under the recommendation of its Leg-
islature, for their assent and ratification.'
This mode of proceeding was adopted; and
by the Convention, by Congress and by the
State Legislatures, the instrument was sub-
mitted to the people. They acted upon it in
the only manner in which they can act safely,
effectually and wisely, on such a subject, by
assembling in Convention. It is true they
assembled in their several States; and where
else should they have assembled? No politi-
cal dreamer was ever wild enough to think
of breaking down the lines which separate
the States, and of compounding the Ameri-
can people into one common mass. Of con-
sequence, when they act they act in their
States. But the measures they adopt, do not,
on that account, cease to be the measures of
the people themselves, or become the meas-
ures of the State governments.
" From these Conventions the Constitution
derives its whole authority. The Government
proceeds directly from the people; is ' ordain-
ed and established' in the name of the people, |
