CHAPTER III.

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION, AND THE CONSTITUTION.

The Declaration, Etc.

The Declaration of Independence opens with a gen­eral proposition as to the right of "one people to dissolve the political bands," etc.

Applying this' general truth to the case in hand, it proceeds with a general statement of the abuses which constrain "these Colonies" to "alter their former sys­tems of government." Then, after detailing the par­ticular abuses of which the Colonies complained, it de­clares that: "These United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is, and ought to be, totally dissolved," etc.

It recognized no government here except that of each Colony, and it warrants no inference that it contem­plated any other government.

The Articles and the Constitution.

For the most satisfactory study of the Articles of Con­federation and the Constitution, it is necessary that we compare them as we proceed.

Under the Articles, all powers granted by the States were to be under the direction of the Congress of the States - "the United States, in Congress assembled;¹ under the Constitution, the powers granted were vested in three separate and independent departments - the Legislative, Judicial and Executive.

Under the Articles, the Legislature consisted of only one House, in which each State could cast only one vote; under the Constitution, the Legislature consists of two Houses, namely, the Senate, in which the equality of the States is preserved by each State's having two Senators, and the House of Representatives, in which each is represented according to its population. except that a State must be allowed at least one member how­ever small its population may be.

Under the Articles, each State supported its own mem­bers; under the Constitution, they are supported out of the Federal treasury.

Under the Articles, the States bound themselves to collect and transmit to the Federal treasury the sums of money required of them, on an established appor­tionment, by the Congress; under the Constitution, the Congress is empowered to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; provided that all direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States according to their representative population, and that all other taxes shall be uniform throughout the States.

Under the Articles, the "Committee of the States" executed the laws when the Congress was not in ses­sion; under the Constitution, the President of the United States executes the laws.²

Under the Articles, the Congress appointed all neces­sary officers, civil, military and judicial; under the Con­stitution, the President, by and with the advice and con­sent of the Senate - that is, the States, since in that body the States have "equal suffrage" - appoints all the officers except some inferior ones, whose appointment the Congress may vest in the President alone, in the Judges, or in the heads of departments, except also that the President is Commander-in-Chief of the army and navy,³ and except also, as under the Articles, all offi­cers of State troops furnished for the common defense, of and below the rank of Colonel, shall be appointed by the States.

Now let us compare the mutual covenants of the States to be found in both instruments; and then the delegations of power by the States to be found in both.

In the first, each State retained its sovereignty, free­dom and independence, and every right, power and jurisdiction which it did not expressly delegate to the United States in Congress assembled;⁴ in the second, all powers not delegated to the United States by the Con­stitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, were re­served to the States respectively, or to the people.

In the first, the States bound themselves under a firm league of friendship to labor for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and gen­eral welfare, etc.; in the second, the object in view was declared to be to establish justice, insure domestic tran­quillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty, etc.

In the first, each State was to have one vote in deter­mining all questions; in the second, the equal power of the several States was preserved in the Senate, wherein "equal suffrage" is secured to each, of which it can not be deprived, without its consent.

In both, the citizens of each State were to be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the sev­eral States.⁵

In both, full faith and credit should be given in each State to the public records of the other States.

In both, persons charged in one State with treason,⁶ felony or other crime, fleeing into another State, were to be delivered up on demand, etc.

In the second, slaves and apprentices - persons bound to service for a term of years - in one State, fleeing into another State, were to be delivered up, etc.⁷

In both, neither the United States nor any one of them should grant any title of nobility.

In the first, no United States officer or State officer should accept any present, office, etc., from any king, prince, or foreign State; in the second, no United States officer should accept such present, etc., without the consent of Congress, nor should any person holding any office under the United States be a member of either House of the Congress during his continuance in office.⁸

In both, no State was to enter into any treaty, alli­ance, etc., without the consent of the Congress.

In both, no two or more States were to form any alli­ance between themselves without the like consent of the States in Congress.

In both, no State, without the like consent, should keep troops or war vessels in time of peace.

In the first, each State was to keep up a well-organized militia; in the second, the Congress was forbidden to infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

In the first, no State was to lay any duty upon for­eign imports if it conflicted with any treaty; in the second, no State was to lay any duty on imports or ex­ports, without the consent of the Congress, except what might be necessary for executing its inspection laws.

In the first, no State was to grant letters of marque and reprisal without the consent of the Congress, un­less it were invaded; in the second, no State was to grant such letters.

In both, no State was to engage in war without the like consent, unless invaded or threatened with invasion.

In the first, each State was to furnish the troops called for by the Congress, arm and equip them at the expense of the United States; in the second, the States confer­red on the Congress the power to raise armies, etc.

In the first, the States were pledged to pay all the debts contracted by the Continental Congress; in the second, they were pledged to discharge all the pecuniary obligations entered into by the United States previously to the establishment of the more perfect Union.

In the first, it was agreed that Canada might come into the Union if she chose to do so, and that other Col­onies or Provinces might do so by the consent of nine States; in the second, it was agreed that Congress might admit new States into the Union, provided that it should not interfere with the boundaries of any State without its consent.⁹

In the first, each State was to abide by the decisions of Congress on all matters which they had entrusted to it, the Articles of Confederation were to be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union was to be per­petual; in the second, the Constitution, the Constitu­tional acts of Congress, and all treaties made or to be made were to be the supreme law of the land, to sup­port which all judicial, executive and legislative offi­cers of the several States should be bound by oath or affirmation - an oath which the actual administration of the Government has rendered practically meaning­less; but which, when it is understood that the "moral obligation of the States " is the only Constitutional se­curity for the faithful observance of the mutual cove­nants of the States, is as necessary and is as pregnant with meaning as the oath of the President.¹⁰

And in the first, no alteration should be made in the Articles without the consent of every State; In the second, two methods of amending the Constitution were provided. One was that two-thirds of both Houses might propose amendments, which, being ratified by three-fourths of the States, should be valid parts of the Constitution;¹¹ and the other was that on the application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the States, the Con­gress should call a Convention of the States for propos­ing amendments, which' should likewise become parts of the Constitution when ratified by three-fourths of
the States.

In the first, no member of Congress could, while a member, hold any office under the United States; in the second, no Senator or Representative can, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been in­creased during such time.

In the second, each State obligated itself not to pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or any law vio­lating the obligation of contracts.

In the second, each State obligated itself not to lay any tax on tonnage without the consent of Congress.

And in the second, the United States obligated them­selves to guarantee to each other a republican form of government; to defend each other in case of invasion; and, if called on by the Legislature or by the Governor (when the Legislature can not be convened), to protect each other against domestic violence.

Such are the mutual covenants; and now we will compare the powers delegated by the States in the two instruments, besides the few already mentioned.

In the first, the United States in Congress assembled, nine States consenting, had the sole and exclusive right and power of determining on peace and war, except in the cases mentioned already - actual invasion, etc.; in the second, the same power, with the same exception, is granted to the Congress.

In the first, the Congress had the like power to send Ambassadors; in the second, the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate (or States, since the States have equal suffrage in that body), appoints Ambassadors.

In the first, the Congress had the like power to re­ceive Ambassadors; in the second, the President alone receives Ambassadors.
In the first, the Congress had the like power to make treaties, with a proviso; in the second, the President, by and with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senators, makes treaties.

In both, the Congress is empowered to make rules concerning captures on land and water.

In both, exclusive power was delegated to the Con­gress to grant letters of marque and reprisal in time of peace.

In both, the Congress was empowered to provide for the punishment of piracies and felonies committed on the high seas.

In the first, disputes between States were to be set­tled, in the last resort, by the Congress; in the second, such disputes are to be settled by the United States courts.

In the first, disputes about titles to land granted by different States were to be decided by the Congress; in the second, such disputes are to be settled by the Fed­eral Courts.

In the first, the Congress had the sole and exclusive right and power of regulating the alloy and value of coin struck by their own authority, or by that of the respective States; in the second, the Congress has the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin.

In both, the Congress was granted power to fix the standard of weights and measures.

In the first, the Congress was empowered to regulate the trade and manage all affairs with the Indians, with a proviso; in the second, the Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, between the States, and with the Indian tribes.

In the first, the Congress had power to establish or regulate post-offices from one State to another; in the second, the Congress has power to establish post-offices and post roads.

In the first, the Congress had power to appoint all naval officers and the officers of the land forces, except regimental officers; in the second, these officers are ap­pointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, with certain exceptions made by the Congress, as before mentioned.

In both, the Congress was empowered to make rules for the government of the land and naval forces.

In both, the Congress was empowered to borrow money on the credit of the United States.

In the first, the Congress was empowered to emit bills on the credit of the United States; in the second, no such power was granted, the proposition to grant it being deliberately stricken out from the final draft of the Constitution as submitted to the Convention.¹²

In both, the power was granted to provide and main­tain a navy.

Thus we have gone over the powers delegated to the United States in Congress assembled, and those in the Constitution relating to similar subjects. There are a few others in the Constitution, some of them made nec­essary by the Constitution of the Congress. They are as follows:

The Senate is made a court to try impeachments, a two-thirds vote being necessary to conviction.

The Congress may alter, amend or substitute others for State laws regulating the times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, except as to the places of choosing Senators.¹³

For the different naturalization laws of the States, Congress was authorized to substitute one uniform rule; and to do the like with reference to bankruptcies.

It can provide for punishing counterfeiters of the securities and current coin of the United States.

It can promote inventions and discoveries, etc.

It can provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions.

It can provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such parts of them as may be employed in the service of the United States.

It is empowered to dispose of the public lands which were ceded to the United States after the adoption of the Articles of Confederation, and all other property be longing to the United States, and to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the same.

It can exercise exclusive legislation over such district as may, by cession of particular States and the accept­ance of Congress, become the seat of government, and also over all places purchased by the consent of the Legislature of the State in which the satne may be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings.

And it may make all laws which may be necessary and proper for carrying into execution all the powers granted by the States in the Constitution.

To these provisions must now be added those which were designed to shield the States and the people against the exercise of objectionable and usurped powers. Briefly stated they are as follows:

1. The importation of African slaves could not be prohibited till 1808.

2. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless the public safety may require it in case of rebellion, invasion. etc.

3. No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.

4. No capitation or other direct tax shall be laid, ex­cept in proportion to the representative population of the several States.

5. No tax shall be laid on any article exported from any State.

6. No preference shall be given to the ports of any one State.

7. No money shall be appropriated for raising or sup­porting armies for a longer period than two years.

8. No punishment for treason, which is defined to be a levying of war against the United States, adhering to their enemies, etc., shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture except during the life of the traitor.

9. No law shall be passed interfering with the religion of the people, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assem­ble and petition for a redress of grievances.

10. No soldier shall be quartered in any man's house in time of peace against his will, nor in time of war, but in a manner prescribed by law.

11. Unreasonable searches and seizures are forbidden, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly de­scribing the place to be searched, and the person or thing to be seized.

12. No person shall he tried for a capital or other in­famous crime, unless on an indictment or presentment of a grand jury, except in the army or navy; nor shall any person be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall any person be compelled in a criminal case to be a witness against himself; nor shall he be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law; nor shall his property be taken from him without just com­pensation.

13. Every person accused of a crime shall enjoy the right to a speedy trial, by an impartial jury of the State and District in which the offense is alleged to have been committed, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.¹⁴

14, The right of trial by jury shall be preserved in suits where the value in controversy shall exceed $20, etc.

15. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments in­flicted.

16. The judicial power shall not extend (as was pro­vided for in the Constitution as it was adopted) to any suit in law or equity against one of the United States, prosecuted by citizens of another State, or by citizens or subjects of a foreign State.

17. And since a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a "free State," the right of the people of a State "to keep and bear arms" shall not be in­fringed by the Federal Government.

Thus it appears that the States delegated in the Con­stitution only two important powers not found in the Articles of Confederation, namely, that to lay and col­lect taxes, etc., and that to regulate commerce; and that the States agreed to forego no really important power except that to replenish their treasuries by taxes on imports.

And it also appears that the delegation of what are called "sovereign powers" in the Constitution - foreign intercourse, war, etc. - is no stronger evidence of a dele­gation of sovereignty than the delegation of them in the Articles was;¹⁵ and on the face of both instruments the "sovereignty, freedom, and independence" of each State were left unimpaired. There is not a syllable to warrant the contrary claim.¹⁶

Now let us, in conclusion, point out the important powers belonging to the several sovereign States which they retained:

1. The State was the heir of all property belonging to one of its citizens - man, woman, or child - who died without other heirs.

2. The State could condemn for public use any land or other property in its borders.

3. The State could punish its citizens for treason¹⁷ (See Constitution of the U. S., Art. IV, sec. 11. clause 2), felony or other crimes against the peace and dignity of the State.

4. The State could provide for the probate of deeds, conveyances, powers of attorney, and wills, and enforce compliance with their terms.¹⁸

5. The State could punish one of its citizens for any trespass, assault, libel, or any other offense committed by him against the person or the property or the repu­tation of another citizen.

6. The State could establish and enforce relations be­tween husband and wife, parent and children, employer and employee, and corporations and the people.

7. The State could provide for the education of the children of its citizens, the care of the unfortunate deaf, dumb, blind, insane, and helpless poor.

8. The State could exclude undesirable foreigners from its borders, and its right to do so was never dele­gated to the Congress of the United States.

9. The State could make gold and silver coin a tender in the payment of debts. This it never surrendered, nor did it delegate to the Congress a concurrent power.

10. The State could determine the qualifications of electors and of public officers. And, in short,

11. The State reserved to itself those powers which in the words of Mr. Madison (Federalist XLV) "extend to all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."

With the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation. and the Constitution thus set before him, the reader is prepared to judge for himself, without respect to great names, whether the reasoning in the following chapters is founded on truth or error.¹⁹

NOTE D.

Among the bills passed by the Congress during its first four years, without any unquestioned Constitutional authority, were the fol­lowing:

1. To take charge of river pilots in the several States, and pre­scribe their duties.

2. To regulate contracts between merchant seamen and their em­ployers.

3. To establish a United States Bank.

4. To apportion members of Congress among the States after the census of 1790. This was vetoed by the President.

5. To declare what coins should be legal tender.

6. To prescribe the "duty" of the Governor of a State to which a fugitive from justice has fled.

7. To prescribe the duties of magistrates of counties, cities and towns whenever a fugitive from labor should be brought before them by the person claiming his labor.

It was claimed that the first and second of these fell under the power to regulate commerce; that the third fell under the power to make all laws which should be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the power to collect taxes and to appropriate them; that the fifth fell under the power to regulate the value of coins (although the right of each State to make gold and silver coins a tender for a debt was recognized); and that the sixth and seventh fell under - nobody knows what power.

To the claim regarding the second it may be objected that, if it is valid, Congress can regulate the wages of teamsters engaged in in­terstate commerce; to that regarding the fifth it may be objected that, if Congress can declare what shall be legal tender, it can de­clare that gold and silver coins shall not be a legal tender, and thus nullify the power of the several States; to that regarding the sixth and seventh it may be objected that, if Congress can prescribe the duties of the executive and judicial officers of a State, the State Governments are little more than agents to carry out the will of the Congress; and in regard to all these claims it may be objected that, if they are valid, it was useless to place any enumeration of powers in the Constitution.

NOTE E.

It is important, in view of the shameful perversion of truth since 1861. that it be impressed on the mind that the first ten amendments were added to the Constitution for the purpose of shielding the peo­ple against Federal encroachments on their rights, and that they have nothing to do with State or individual encroachments. This is important because ignorance and fanaticism have not labored in vain.

Among the first authoritative expositions (from the standpoint of ignorance) was a resolution passed by the House of Representatives on the 17th of March, 1862, instructing a committee to inquire into the arrest of two fugitive slaves in the District of Columbia, " and whether the arrest and imprisonment is not a direct violation of that provision of the Constitution (the Fifth Article of Amend­ments), which says that no person shall be deprived of his life or lib­erty without due process of law." Afterwards this perversion of truth became generally acceped as truth, and all these restraints on the Federal Government were thought to be restraints on the States or the people.

And even the Washington Post, Administration organ, comment­ing on a provision in the new Constitution of Mississippi, which de­nies a jury trial to a certain class of criminals, copies the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Federal Constitution, and then says: "The Post does not profess to be learned in the law and will not presume to determine whether or not this Louisiana innovation is in harmony with the fundamental law of the Republic. But to a mind unversed in the intricacies of judicial interpretation it seems that the words 'all criminal cases' in the Federal Constitution must include other crimes than those which are punishable, under the statutes, 'by imprisonment at hard labor.' " - Copied in Wilmington, N. C., Mes­senger. October 23, 1898.

It is equally important that we do not let the fact escape us that in nearly all our political literature the Constitution has been sup­planted by "emergencies," "new conditions," "the march of na­tions," etc.

Footnotes:

1. The enacting clause of every act of Congress - "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled" - recognizes the truth that the Congress under the Constitution is a Congress of States.

2. The oath of the President "to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," was understood by Mr. Lincoln to be an oath to preserve the Union. In his first inaugural address he said: "You have no oath registered in Heaven to destroy the Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to 'preserve, protect and defend it.' " And this is the view of that oath pre­sented to the youth of the Union by even so fair a writer as Montgomery. - Am. Hist., page 286.

3. The following remarks by Mr. Hamilton in No. LXVII of the Federalist, intended to silence those who had objected to the crea­tion of the office of President, which they had " inveighed against with less candor," and "criticised with less judgment" than any other provision of the Constitution, may amuse the reader:

"Calculating upon the aversion of the people to monarchy, they have endeavored to enlist all their jealousies and apprehensions in opposition.... To establish the pretended affinity, they have not scrupled to draw resources even from the regions of fiction. The authorities of a magistrate, in few instances greater, in some less, than those of a Governor of New York, have been magnified into more than royal prerogatives."

4. Notwithstanding this clear language, of the meaning of which no school boy could have any doubt, John Fiske, a representative of the culture of New England, says on page 94 of his Critical Period, etc., that by the Articles "the sovereignty of the several States was expressly limited and curtailed in many important particulars." And Mr. Fiske seems unconscious of the inconsistency of this implied admission of the existence of "the sovereignty of the several States," with the assertion on the same page (94) that "in severing their connection with England these Commonwealths (sic) entered into some sort of union which was incompatible with their absolute sovereignty taken severally."

But after John A. Andrew, the Governor of; Massachusetts, an­nounced the doctrine, in the Altoona Address, that the people of the States are "the subjects of the National Government," political vagaries in that quarter should not surprise us.

5. On September 25, 1898, one hundred free citizens of the State of Alabama reached Virden in the State of Illinois, having been em­ployed to work in coal mines in that locality; but threats of shoot­ing them drove them back to Alabama. Again, on October 12, of the same year, two hundred free citizens of Southern States went to the same place for the same purpose; but they were met by rifle shots instead of threats. In both instances Governor Tanner, of Illinois, declined to insure to these people the enjoyment of the privileges and immunities of free citizens of Illinois.

6. North Carolina's "carpet-bag" Constitution defines treason against the State.

7. A clear understanding of the infractions of the Constitution by certain States requires us to bear in mind that no power was dele­gated to the Congress of the Confederation to enforce the mutual covenants of the States respecting their public records, " the privileges and immunities of citizens," the restoration of criminals, or the restoration of slaves or servants provided for in the Ordinance for the government of the Northwest Territory; and that no such power was delegated in the Constitution over these covenants or over that respecting fugitives from labor. In the language of the Supreme Court in Kentucky v. Ohio, 24 Howard, 66 (commenting on the Act of February 12, 1793, prescribing the "duty" of the Gov­ernor of a State when a demand is made for a fugitive from justice), the security for the performance of these covenants is " the moral cbligation" of the States. See Note D.

8. Many officers who served in the armies which subjugated the Southern States, and were afterwards placed on the retired list with comfortable salaries, have served in both Houses of Congress and drawn their salaries as other members; and many gentlemen have served in both Houses, drawing their salaries regularly, whose pen­sions were affording them a comfortable living. Thus in one case the letter, and in the other the spirit of the Constitution has been disregarded; it was not intended that a pensioner should sit in the Legislature and assist in framing pension laws.

9. West Virginia was erected into a State within the boundaries of Virginia without the consent of the latter.

10. There is no intimation here that the Government was to be su­preme; and the oath of the State officer to support the Constitution was no more an oath of allegiance, as is implied in the Fourteenth Amendment, than his oath to support his State Constitution is an oath of allegiance to his State. And even if it were, his oath could not bind his constituents.

11. The reader will note that " two-thirds of both Houses " did not mean two-thirds of the bodies which proposed the last three amend­ments; and that the ratifications of the States were to be without any fear of confiscation or of prolonged military despotism.

12. On the motion to strike out, the States voting in the affirmative were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, 9; and those voting in the negative were New Jersey and Maryland, 2. - El. Deb., I, 245.

13. The reader will be interested in the following remarks made by Gen. William R. Davie in defense of this provision of the Constitu­tion. He had been a member of the Convention which framed the Constitution; was now a member of North Carolina's Convention which rejected it; and was an ardent supporter of it.

Attempting to meet the objections of his opponents (whom subse­quent events have proved not to have been wholly devoid of the spirit of prophecy), he said:

"Mr. Chairman, a consolidation of the States is said by some gen­tlemen to have been intended. They insinuate that this was the cause of their giving this power of elections" - times, places, and manner. "If there were any seeds in this Constitution which might, one day, produce a consolidation, it would, sir, with me, be an in­superable objection." - Elliot's Debates, Volume IV, page 58.

14. The treatment of Major Henry Wirtz will impress these two pro­visions of the Constitution on the reader's memory. He was not "in the army or navy"; he was not tried on "an indictment or presentment of a grand jury"; he was tried in Washington City by a court martial organized to convict instead of "by an impartial jury of the State and District" in which the alleged offense was commit­ted; he had no "compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor," and those who volunteered to go as witnesses were fright­ened away by threats of arrest; and he was "deprived of life" "with­out due process of law."

15. This truth has been hidden from their readers by almost all modern political writers in the Northern States. One of the most respec­table of them, John Fiske, does this on pages 208 and 209 of his Civil Government in the United States, where he steps from the Continental Congress to the Congress of the Constitution, utterly ignoring the Congress of the Confederation. He does the same on page 243, where he says that " from 1776 to 1789 the United States were a Confederation; after 1789 it was a Federal Nation" (italics and "it" his). Then, apparently adopting Mr. Greeley's view that the States were entrapped when they adopted the Constitution, he says: "The passage from plural to singular was accomplished, although it took some people a good while to realize the fact."

And even " the great expounder," Mr. Webster, confounded the Continental Congress with the Congress of the Confederation. In his speech to the young men of Albany, N. Y., May 28, 1851, he said: "And you, my young friends of Albany, if you will take the pains to go back to the debates of the period, from the meeting of the first Congress, in 1774, I mean the Congress of the Confederation, to the adoption of the present Constitution, and the enact­ment of the first laws under it," etc.

16. Mr. Madison, in the Federalist, No. XL, replying to those who asserted that the Convention in framing the Constitution had not kept in view the fundamental principles of the Articles, says: "I ask, what are these principles? Do they require, that in the estab­lishment of the Constitution, the States should be regarded as dis­tinct and independent sovereignties? They are so regarded by the constitution proposed."

17. The power to punish for treason was destroyed by the Federal Government in 1861-'65; since then many persons guilty of it have been rewarded for it by that Government; and it is now proposed to place them on the pension rolls at the expense, in part, of the people of the Southern States.

18. The Stamp Act of June 13, 1898, which is a substantial reenact­ment of the law of June 30, 1864, nullifies State laws regulating the certification and the validity of contracts, conveyances, etc., unless a Federal revenue stamp be attached to each one; and it does this without any expressed or implied power delegated in the Constitu­tion.

19. See Note E.

Comments. We are interested in comments that generate more light than heat. Please avoid grandstanding: