pressly objected to the language of the preamble, “We the people of the United States." "Have they said, 'We the States'? Have they made a proposal of a ompact between States? If they had, this would be a confederation; it is otherwise most clearly a consolidated government. The question turns, sir, on that poor little thing-the expression, 'We, the people,' instead of the States of America.'"*

The act of adoption by the convention speaks of the powers granted under the Constitution as "being derived from the people of the United States."

In the Pennsylvania convention, Mr. Wilson said: "This is not a government founded upon compact. It is founded upon the power of the people." Again: "This system is not a compact or a contract. system tells you what it is; it is an ordinance and establishment of the people."

The

In the Connecticut convention, Mr. Johnson, who had been a member of the Federal Convention, after speaking of the difficulty of legislating for States in their political capacity, said: “They have, therefore, gone entirely upon new ground. They have formed one new nation out of individual States.”

The preamble itself is very explicit and clear. There is no possibility of mistaking its meaning. It says nothing about the formation of a compact by sovereign States. It says nothing whatever about the

* Elliot's Debates, iii. 72.

States acting as States. It declares, "We, the people of the United States, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Nothing is found in any part of the Constitution making mention of a league or compact between the States. In a league or compact the parties are named, and the mutual stipulations recorded. There is no trace of any thing of this kind in the Constitution. In no place are the States mentioned as contracting parties. The people speak throughout the document. They do not enter into stipulations with a party. They speak with the voice of authority. They declare what powers the government shall exercise, and what powers it shall not exercise.

The second section of the sixth article of the Constitution declares: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United 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, any thing in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

No terms could be more explicit than these. If they do not forbid a State to nullify a law of Congress, or to throw off the authority of the Constitution, then language cannot be so framed as to forbid those acts.

The Constitution appoints an arbiter to decide all

questions relating to the violation of the Constitution. It declares that" the judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitu tion, the laws of the United States, and treaties made or which shall be made under their authority." Every question, therefore, with respect to the violation of the Constitution that can be made the subject of judicial proceedings, that can constitute a case, is to be decided by the Supreme Court, and that decision is final. This completes the supremacy of the Constitution. Suppose a State passes a law conflicting with the Constitution of the United States: a suit is brought under that law, and its constitutionality is argued be fore the Supreme Court. The Court declares the law unconstitutional, and hence null and void: no regard is thenceforth paid to it.

An early decision of the Supreme Court declares, "The Constitution of the United States was ordained and established, not by the States in their sovereign capacity, but emphatically as the preamble of the Constitution declares, by 'the people of the United States.""

The several States cannot with propriety be spoken of as sovereign States. Sovereign power is supreme power-power that has no other power over it. A sovereign State is one that possesses sovereign power. Now, no one of the United States possesses sovereign power. There is a power, that of the Constitution,

higher than the power of any State. This is plair from the declaration, "This Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." Thus the power of every State is limit d: limited power is not sovereign power.

CHAPTER X.

CONGRESS-HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

ART. 1. SECTION I. "All Legislative powers herein granted, shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

The first resolution adopted by the Federal Convention, as we have seen, contemplated the formation of a government with Legislative, Judicial, and Executive departments. In carrying out that resolution, it was intended to keep those departments distinct and independent. The experience of the past has shown that when these departments are distinct, that is, when one class of men make the laws, and another class interpret them, and a third execute them, justice is much more likely to be done than when the legislative, judicial, and executive powers are possessed by the same person or persons. This division of power is wanting in an absolute monarchy. Hence there can be no security against injustice under such a government.