A BRIEF ENQUIRY

第2章

SofarasJudgeStory"sargumentisconcerned,thesubjectmightbepermittedtoresthere.Indeed,onewouldbetemptedtothink,fromtheapparentcarelessnessandindifferencewithwhichtheargumentisurged,thathehimselfdidnotattachtoitanyparticularimportance.Itisnothishabittodismissgravematterswithsuchlightexamination,nordoesitconsistwiththecharacterofhismindtobesatisfiedwithreasoningwhichbearsevenadoubtfulrelationtohissubject.NeithercanitbesupposedthathewouldbewillingtorelyonthesimpleipsedixitofChiefJusticeJay,unsupportedbyargument,unsustainedbyanyreferencetohistoricalfacts,andwhollyindefiniteinextentandbearing.Why,then,wasthispassagewritten?Asmerehistory,apartfromitsbearingontheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates,itisofnovalueinthiswork,andiswhollyoutofplace.Alldoubtsuponthissubjectwillberemovedintheprogressofthisexamination.ThegreateffortofJudgeStory,throughouttheentirework,istoestablishthedoctrine,thattheConstitutionoftheUnitedStatesisagovernmentof"thepeopleoftheUnitedStates,"ascontradistinguishedfromthepeopleoftheseveralStates;or,inotherwords,thatitisaconsolidated,andnotafederativesystem.Hisconstructionofeverycontestedfederalpowerdependsmainlyuponthisdistinction;andhencethenecessityofestablishingaonenessamongthepeopleoftheseveralcolonies,priortotheRevolution.Itmaywellexciteoursurprise,thatapropositionsonecessarytotheprincipaldesignofthework,shouldbestatedwithsolittleprecision,anddismissedwithsolittleefforttosustainitbyargument.OnesowellinformedasJudgeStory,ofthestateofpoliticalopinionsinthiscountry,couldscarcelyhavesupposedthatitwouldbereceivedasanadmittedtruth,requiringnoexamination.ItenterstoodeeplyintogravequestionsofConstitutionallaw,tobesosummarilydisposedof.Weshouldnotbecontent,therefore,withsimplyprovingthatJudgeStoryhasassignednosufficientreasonfortheopinionhehasadvanced.

Thesubjectdemandsofusthestillfartherproofthathisopinionis,infact,erroneous,andthatitcannotbesustainedbyanyotherreasons.

Inordertoconstitute"onepeople,"inapoliticalsense,oftheinhabitantsofdifferentcountries,somethingmoreisnecessarythanthattheyshouldoweacommonallegiancetoacommonsovereign.Neitherisitsufficientthat,insomeparticulars,theyareboundalike,bylawswhichthatsovereign,mayprescribe;nordoesthequestiondependongeographicalrelations.

Theinhabitantsofdifferentislandsmaybeonepeople,andthoseofcontiguouscountriesmaybe,asweknowtheyinfactare,differentnations.Bytheterm"people,"ashereused,wedonotmeanmerelyanumberofpersons.

Wemeanbyitapoliticalcorporation,themembersofwhichoweacommonallegiancetoacommonsovereignty,anddonotoweanyallegiancewhichisnotcommon;whoareboundbynolawsexceptsuchasthatsovereigntymayprescribe;whoowetooneanotherreciprocalobligations;whopossesscommonpoliticalinterests;whoareliabletocommonpoliticalduties;

andwhocanexertnosovereignpowerexceptinthenameofthewhole.Anythingshortofthis,wouldbeanimperfectdefinitionofthatpoliticalcorporationwhichwecalla"people."

Testedbythisdefinition,thepeopleoftheAmericancolonieswere,innoconceivablesense,"onepeople."Theyowed,indeed,allegiancetotheBritishKing,astheheadofeachcolonialgovernment,andasformingapartthereof;butthisallegiancewasexclusive,ineachcolony,toitsowngovernment,and,consequently,totheKingastheheadthereof,andwasnotacommonallegianceofthepeopleofallthecolonies,toacommonhead.2Thesecolonialgovernmentswereclothedwiththesovereignpowerofmakinglaws,andofenforcingobediencetothem,fromtheirownpeople.Thepeopleofonecolonyowednoallegiancetothegovernmentofanyothercolony,andwerenotboundbyitslaws.

Thecolonieshadnocommonlegislature,nocommontreasury,nocommonmilitarypower,nocommonjudicatory.Thepeopleofonecolonywerenotliabletopaytaxestoanyothercolony,nortobeararmsinitsdefence;theyhadnorighttovoteinitselections;noinfluencenorcontrolinitsmunicipalgovernment;nointerestinitsmunicipalinstitutions.Therewasnoprescribedformbywhichthecoloniescouldacttogether,foranypurposewhatever;

theywerenotknownas"onepeople"inanyonefunctionofgovernment.

Althoughtheywereall,alike,dependenciesoftheBritishCrown,yet,evenintheactionoftheparentcountry,inregardtothem,theywererecognizedasseparateanddistinct.Theywereestablishedatdifferenttimes,andeachunderanauthorityfromtheCrown,whichappliedtoitselfalone.Theywerenotevenalikeintheirorganization.Somewereprovincial,someproprietary,andsomechartergovernments.Eachderiveditsformofgovernmentfromtheparticularinstrumentestablishingit,orfromassumptionsofpoweracquiescedinbytheCrown,withoutanyconnectionwith,orrelationto,anyother.Theystooduponthesamefooting,ineveryrespect,withotherBritishcolonies,withnothingtodistinguishtheirrelationeithertotheparentcountryortooneanother.Thecharterofanyoneofthemmighthavebeendestroyed,withoutinanymanneraffectingtherest.Inpointoffact,thechartersofnearlyallofthemwerealtered,fromtimetotime,andthewholecharacteroftheirgovernmentchanged.Thesechangesweremadeineachcolonyforitselfalone,sometimesbyitsownaction,sometimesbythepowerandauthorityoftheCrown;butneverbythejointagencyofanyothercolony,andneverwithreferencetothewishesordemandsofanyothercolony.Thustheywereseparateanddistinctintheircreation;

separateanddistinctinthechangesandmodificationsoftheirgovernments,whichweremadefromtimetotime;separateanddistinctinpoliticalfunctions,inpoliticalrights,andinpoliticalduties.

TheprovincialgovernmentofVirginiawasthefirstestablished.ThepeopleofVirginiaowedallegiancetotheBritishKing,astheheadoftheirownlocalgovernment.Theauthorityofthatgovernmentwasconfinedwithincertaingeographicallimits,knownasVirginia,andallwholivedwithinthoselimitswere"onepeople."WhenthecolonyofPlymouthwassubsequentlysettled,werethepeopleofthatcolony"one"withthepeopleofVirginia?When,longafterwards,theproprietarygovernmentofPennsylvaniawasestablished,werethefollowersofWilliamPenn"one"withthepeopleofPlymouthandVirginia?Ifso,towhichgovernmentwastheirallegiancedue?Virginiahadagovernmentofherown,andMassachusettsagovernmentofherown.ThepeopleofPennsylvaniacouldnotbeequallyboundbythelawsofallthreegovernments,becausethoselawsmighthappentoconflict;

theycouldnotowethedutiesofcitizenshiptoallofthemalike,becausetheymightstandinhostilerelationstooneanother.Either,then,thegovernmentofVirginia,whichoriginallyextendedoverthewholeterritory,continuedtobesupremetherein,(subjectonlytoitsdependenceontheBritishCrown),orelseitssupremacywasyieldedtothenewgovernment.

Everyoneknowsthatthislastwasthecase;thatwithintheterritoryofthenewgovernmenttheauthorityofthatgovernmentaloneprevailed.

HowthencouldthepeopleofthisnewgovernmentofPennsylvaniabesaidtobe"one"withthepeopleofVirginia,whentheywerenotcitizensofVirginia,owedhernoallegianceandnoduty,andwhentheirallegiancetoanothergovernmentmightplacethemintherelationofenemiesofVirginia?3

Infartherillustrationofthispoint,letussupposethatsomeoneofthecolonieshadrefusedtouniteintheDeclarationofIndependence,whatrelationwoulditthenhaveheldtotheothers?NothavingdisclaimeditsallegiancetotheBritishCrown,itwouldstillhavecontinuedtobeaBritishcolony,subjecttotheauthorityoftheparentcountry,inallrespectsasbefore.Couldtheothercolonieshaverightfullycompelledittounitewiththemintheirrevolutionarypurposes,onthegroundthatitwaspartandparcelofthe"onepeople,"knownasthepeopleofthecolonies?Nosuchrightwaseverclaimed,ordreamedof,anditwillscarcelybecontendedfornow,inthefaceoftheknownhistoryofthetime.SuchrecusantcolonywouldhavestoodpreciselyasdidtheCanadas,andeveryotherpartoftheBritishempire.Thecolonies,whichhaddeclaredwar,wouldhaveconsidereditspeopleasenemies,butwouldnothavehadarighttotreatthemastraitors,orasdisobedientcitizensresistingtheirauthority.

Towhatpurpose,then,werethepeopleofthecolonies"onepeople,"if,inacasesoimportanttothecommonwelfare,therewasnorightinallthepeopletogether,tocoercethemembersoftheirowncommunitytotheperformanceofacommonduty?

Itisthusapparentthatthepeopleofthecolonieswerenot"onepeople,"

astoanypurposeinvolvingallegianceontheonehand,orprotectionontheother.What,then,Iagainask,arethe"manypurposes"towhichJudgeStoryalludes?Itiscertainlyincumbentonhimwhoassertsthisidentity,againsttheinferencesmostnaturallydeduciblefromthehistoricalfacts,toshowatwhattime,bywhatprocess,andforwhatpurposes,itwaseffected.

Heclaimstoomuchconsiderationforhispersonalauthority,whenherequireshisreaderstorejecttheplaininformationofhistory,infavorofhisbareassertion.Thechartersofthecoloniesprovenoidentitybetweenthem,butthereverse;andithasalreadybeenshownthatthisidentityisnotthenecessaryresultoftheircommonrelationtothemothercountry.

Bywhatothermeanstheycametobe"one,"inanyintelligibleandpoliticalsense,itremainsforJudgeStorytoexplain.

Iftheseviewsofthesubjectbenotconvincing,JudgeStoryhimselfhasfurnishedproof,inallneedfulabundance,oftheincorrectnessofhisownconclusion.Hetellsusthat,"thoughthecolonieshadacommonorigin,andowedacommonallegiance,andtheinhabitantsofeachwereBritishsubjects,theyhadnodirectpoliticalconnectionwitheachother.

Eachwasindependentofalltheothers;each,inalimitedsense,wassovereignwithinitsownterritory.Therewasneitheralliancenorconfederacybetweenthem.Theassemblyofoneprovincecouldnotmakelawsforanother,norconferprivilegeswhichweretobeenjoyedorexercisedinanother,fartherthantheycouldbeinanyindependentforeignStates.Theywereknownonlyasdependencies,andtheyfollowedthefateoftheparentcountry,bothinpeaceandwar,withouthavingassignedtothem,intheintercourseordiplomacyofnations,anydistinctorindependentexistence.Theydidnotpossessthepowerofforminganyleagueortreatyamongthemselves,whichwouldacquireanobligatoryforce,withouttheassentoftheparentState.

Andthoughtheirmutualwantsandnecessitiesofteninducedthemtoassociateforcommonpurposesofdefense,theseconfederacieswereofacasualandtemporarynature,andwereallowedasanindulgence,ratherthanasaright.

Theymadeseveraleffortstoprocuretheestablishmentofsomegeneralsuperintendinggovernmentoverthemall;buttheirowndifferenceofopinion,aswellasthejealousyoftheCrown,madetheseeffortsabortive."

TheEnglishlanguageaffordsnotermsstrongerthanthosewhicharehereusedtoconveytheideaofseparateness,distinctness,andindependence,amongthecolonies.Nocommentarycouldmakethedescriptionplainer,ormorefullandcomplete.Theunity,contendedforbyJudgeStory,nowhereappears,butisdistinctlydisaffirmedineverysentence.Thecolonieswerenotonlydistinctintheircreation,andinthepowersandfacultiesoftheirgovernments,buttherewasnoteven"anallianceorconfederacybetweenthem."Theyhad"nogeneralsuperintendinggovernmentoverthemall,"andtriedinvaintoestablishone.Eachwas"independentofalltheothers,"havingitsownlegislature,andwithoutpowertoconfereitherrightorprivilegebeyonditsownterritory."Each,inalimitedsense,wassovereignwithinitsownterritory";andtosumupall,inasinglesentence,"theyhadnodirectpoliticalconnectionwitheachother!"Theconditionofthecolonieswas,indeed,anomalous,ifJudgeStory"sviewofitbecorrect.Theypresentedthesingularspectacleof"onepeople,"

orpoliticalcorporation,themembersofwhichhad"nodirectpoliticalconnectionwitheachother,"andwhohadnotthepowertoformsuchconnection,even"byleagueortreatyamongthemselves."

Thisbriefreviewwill,itisbelieved,besufficienttoconvincethereaderthatJudgeStoryhasgreatlymistakentherealconditionandrelationofthecolonies,insupposingthattheyformed"onepeople,"inanysense,orforanypurposewhatever.Heisentitledtocredit,however,forthecandorwithwhichhehasstatedthehistoricalfacts.Apartfromallothersourcesofinformation,hisbookaffordstoeveryreaderabundantmaterialsfortheformationofhisownopinion,andforenablinghimtodecidesatisfactorilywhetherJudgeStory"sinferencesfromthefacts,whichhehimselfhasstated,bewarrantedbythemornot.CHAPTERIII.RELATIONOFTHECOLONIESTOEACHOTHERDURINGTHEREVOLUTION?nbsp;

THEYWERENOTTHENONEPEOPLE.Intheexecutionoftheseconddivisionofhisplan,verylittlewasrequiredofJudgeStory,eitherasahistorianoracommentator.Accordingly,hehasalludedbutslightlytotheconditionofthecoloniesduringtheexistenceoftherevolutionarygovernment,andhassketchedwithgreatrapidity,yetsufficientlyindetail,therise,declineandfalloftheConfederation.

Evenhere,however,hehasfallenintosomeerrors,andhasventuredtoexpressdecisiveandimportantopinions,withoutduewarrant.Thedesiretomake"thepeopleoftheUnitedStates"oneconsolidatednationissostrongandpredominant,thatitbreaksforth,oftenuncalledfor,ineverypartofhiswork.HetellsusthatthefirstCongressoftheRevolutionwas"ageneraloranationalgovernment";thatit"wasorganizedundertheauspicesandwiththeconsentofthepeople,actingdirectlyintheirprimarysovereigncapacity,"andwithouttheinterventionofthefunctionariestowhomtheordinarypowersofgovernmentweredelegatedinthecolonies.

HeacknowledgesthatthepowersofthisCongresswerebutill-defined;

thatmanyofthemwereexercisedbymereusurpation,andwereacquiescedinbythepeople,onlyfromtheconfidencereposedinthewisdomandpatriotismofitsmembers,andbecausetherewasnoproperopportunity,duringthepresenceofthewar,toraisenicequestionsofthepowersofgovernment.

Andyetheinfers,fromtheexerciseofpowersthusill-defined,and,ingreatpart,usurped,that"fromthemomentoftheDeclarationofIndependence,ifnotformostpurposesatanantecedentperiod,theunitedcoloniesmustbeconsideredasbeinganationdefacto,"&c.

Averyslightattentiontothehistoryofthetimeswillplacethissubjectinitstruelight.Thecoloniescomplainedofoppressionsfromthemothercountry,andwereanxioustodevisesomemeansbywhichtheirgrievancesmightberedressed.Thesegrievanceswerecommontoallofthem;

forEnglandmadenodiscriminationbetweentheminthegeneralcourseofhercolonialpolicy.Theirrights,asBritishsubjects,hadneverbeenwelldefined;andsomeofthemostimportantoftheserights,asassertedbythemselves,hadbeendeniedbytheBritishCrown.Asearlyas1765amajorityofthecolonieshadmettogetherincongress,orconvention,inNewYork,forthepurposeofdeliberatingonthesegravemattersofcommonconcernandtheythenmadeaformaldeclarationofwhattheyconsideredtheirrights,ascolonistsandBritishsubjects.Thismeasure,however,ledtonoredressoftheirgrievances.Onthecontrary,thesubsequentmeasuresoftheBritishGovernmentgavenewandjustcausesofcomplaint;

sothat,in1774,itwasdeemednecessarythatthecoloniesshouldagainmeettogether,inordertoconsultupontheirgeneralcondition,andprovideforthesafetyoftheircommonrights.HencetheCongresswhichmetatCarpenters"Hall,inPhiladelphia,onthe5thofSeptember,1774.ItconsistedofdelegatesfromNewHampshire,MassachusettsBay,RhodeIslandandProvidencePlantations,ConnecticutfromthecityandcountyofNewYork,andothercountiesintheprovinceofNewYork,NewJersey,Pennsylvania,NewCastle,Kent,andSussexinDelaware,Maryland,Virginia,andSouthCarolina.NorthCarolinawasnotrepresenteduntilthe14thSeptember,andGeorgianotatall.ItisalsoapparentthatNewYorkwasnotrepresentedasacolony,butonlythroughcertainportionsofherpeople;4inlikemanner,LymanHallwasadmittedtohisseat,inthesucceedingCongress,asadelegatefromtheparishofSt.John"s,inGeorgia,althoughhedeclinedtovoteonanyquestionrequiringamajorityofthecoloniestocarryit,becausehewasnottherepresentativeofacolony.ThisCongresspassedavarietyofimportantresolutions,betweenSeptember,1774,andthe22ndOctober,inthesameyear;duringallwhichtimeGeorgiawasnotrepresentedatall;foreventheparishofSt.John"sdidnotappointarepresentativetillMay,1775.Inpointoffact,theCongresswasadeliberativeandadvisorybody,andnothingmore;and,forthisreason,itwasnotdeemedimportant,or,atleast,notindispensable,thatallthecoloniesshouldberepresented,sincetheresolutionsofCongresshadnoobligatoryforcewhatever.Itwasappointedforthesolepurposeoftakingintoconsiderationthegeneralconditionofthecolonies,andofdevisingandrecommendingpropermeasuresforthesecurityoftheirrightsandinterests.Fortheseobjectsnoprecisepowersandinstructionswerenecessary,andbeyondthemnoneweregiven.

NeitherdoesitappearthatanyprecisetimewasassignedforthedurationofCongress.Thedutywithwhichitwaschargedwasextremelysimple;anditwastakenforgrantedthatitwoulddissolveitselfassoonasthedutyshouldbeperformed.5

ItisperfectlyapparentthatthemereappointmentofthisCongressdidnotmakethepeopleofallthecolonies"onepeople,"nora"nationdefacto."Allthecoloniesdidnotuniteintheappointment,neitherascoloniesnorbyanyportionoftheirpeopleactingintheirprimaryassemblies,ashasalreadybeenshown.Thecolonieswerenotindependent,andhadnotevenresolvedtodeclarethemselvessoatanyfuturetime.Onthecontrary,theywereextremelydesiroustopreserveandcontinuetheirconnectionwiththeparentcountry,andCongresswaschargedwiththedutyofdevisingsuchmeasuresaswouldenablethemtodoso,withoutinvolvingasurrenderoftheirrightsasBritishsubjects.Itisequallyclearthatthepowers,withwhichCongresswasclothed,didnotflowfrom,norconstitute"onepeople,"or"nationdefacto,"andthatthatbodywasnot"ageneralornationalgovernment,"noragovernmentofanykindwhatever.TheexistenceofsuchgovernmentwasabsolutelyinconsistentwiththeallegiancewhichthecoloniesstillacknowledgedtotheBritishCrown.JudgeStory,himselfinformsus,inapassagealreadyquoted,thattheyhadnopowertoformsuchgovernment,nortoenterinto"anyleagueortreatyamongthemselves."

Indeed,Congressdidnotclaimanylegislativepowerwhatever,norcouldithavedonesoconsistentlywiththepoliticalrelationswhichthecoloniesstillacknowledgedanddesiredtopreserve.Itsactswereintheformofresolutions,andnotintheformoflaws;itrecommendedtoitsconstituentswhateveritbelievedtobefortheiradvantage,butitcommandednothing.

Eachcolony,andthepeoplethereof,wereatperfectlibertytoactuponsuchrecommendationornot,astheymightthinkproper.6

Onthe22ndOctober,1774,thisCongressdissolveditself,havingrecommendedtotheseveralcoloniestoappointdelegatestoanotherCongress,tobeheldinPhiladelphiainthefollowingMay.Accordinglydelegateswerechosen,astheyhadbeenchosentotheprecedingCongress,eachcolonyandthepeoplethereofactingforthemselves,andbythemselves;

andthedelegatesthuschosenwereclothedwithsubstantiallythesamepowers,forpreciselythesameobjects,asintheformerCongress.Indeed,itcouldnothavebeenotherwise;fortherelationsofthecolonieswerestillunchanged,andanymeasureestablishing"ageneralornationalgovernment,"

orunitingthecoloniessoastoconstitutethem"anationdefacto,"wouldhavebeenanactofopenrebellion,andwouldhaveseveredatonceallthetieswhichboundthemtothemothercountry,andwhichtheywerestillanxioustopreserve.NewYorkwasrepresentedinthisCongresspreciselyasshehadbeenintheformerone,thatis,bydelegateschosenbyapartofherpeople;fortheroyalpartywassostronginthatcolony,thatitwouldhavebeenimpossibletoobtainfromthelegislatureanexpressionofapprobationofanymeasureofresistancetoBritishauthority.TheaccessionofGeorgiatothegeneralassociationwasnotmadeknowntillthe20thofJuly,andherdelegatesdidnottaketheirseatstillthe13thofSeptember.InthemeantimeCongresshadproceededinthedischargeofitsduties,andsomeofitsmostimportantacts,andamongtheresttheappointmentofacommander-in-chiefoftheirarmies,wereperformedwhilethesetwocolonieswereunrepresented.Itsacts,likethoseoftheformerCongress,wereintheformofresolutionandrecommendation;forasitstillheldoutthehopeofreconciliationwiththeparentcountry,itdidnotventuretoassumethefunctionofauthoritativelegislation.Itcontinuedtoholdthisattitudeandtoactinthismodetillthe4thofJuly,1776,whenitdeclaredthatthecoloniesthererepresented(includingNewYork,whichhadaccededaftertheBattleofLexington),were,andofrightoughttobe,freeandindependentStates.7

Itistoberemarked,thatnonewpowerswereconferredonCongressaftertheDeclarationofIndependence.Strictlyspeaking,theyhadnoauthoritytomakethatDeclaration.Theywerenotappointedforanysuchpurpose,butpreciselythereverse;andalthoughsomeofthemwereexpresslyauthorizedtoagreetoit,yetotherswerenot.Indeed,weareinformedbyMr.Jefferson,thattheDeclarationwasopposedbysomeofthefirmestpatriotsofthebody,andamongtherest,byR.R.Livingston,Dickenson,Wilson,andE.

Rutlege,onthegroundthatitwaspremature;thatthepeopleofNewYork,NewJersey,MarylandandDelawarewerenotyetripeforit,butwouldsoonunitewiththerest,ifnotindiscreetlyurged.Inenteringuponsoboldastep,Congressactedpreciselyastheydidinallothercases,inthenameoftheStateswhoserepresentativestheywere,andwithafullreliancethatthoseStateswouldconfirmwhatevertheymightdoforthegeneralgood.Theywere,strictly,agentsorministersofindependentStates,actingeachundertheauthorityandinstructionsofhisown,State,andhavingnopowerwhatever,exceptwhattheseinstructionsconferred.TheStatesthemselveswerenotboundbytheresolvesofCongress,exceptsofarastheyrespectivelyauthorizedtheirowndelegatestobindthem.Therewasnooriginalgrantofpowerstothatbody,exceptfordeliberationandadvisement;

therewasnoconstitution,nolaw,noagreement,towhichtheycouldrefer,inordertoascertaintheextentoftheirpowers.Themembersdidnotallactunderthesameinstructions,norwiththesameextentofauthority.

ThedifferentStatesgavedifferentinstructions,eachaccordingtoitsownviewsofrightandpolicy,andwithoutreferencetoanygeneralschemetowhichtheywereallboundtoconform.Congresshadinfactnopowerofgovernmentatall,norhaditthatcharacterofpermanencywhichisimpliedintheideaofgovernment.Itcouldnotpassanobligatorylaw,nordeviseanobligatorysanction,byvirtueofanyinherentpowerinitself.

Itwas,asalreadyremarked,preciselythesamebodyaftertheDeclarationofIndependenceasbefore.Asitwasnotthenagovernment,andcouldnotestablishanyneworvalidrelationsbetweenthecolonies,solongastheyacknowledgedthemselvesdependenciesoftheBritishCrown,theycertainlycouldnotdosoaftertheDeclarationofIndependence,withoutsomenewgrantofpower.ThedependentcolonieshadthenbecomeindependentStates;

theirpoliticalconditionandrelationswerenecessarilychangedbythatcircumstance;thedeliberativeandadvisorybody,throughwhomtheyhadconsultedtogetherascolonies,wasfunctusofficio;theauthoritywhichappointedthemhadceasedtoexist,orwassuspendedbyahigherauthority.

Everythingwhichtheydid,afterthisperiodandbeforetheArticlesofConfederation,waswithoutanyotherrightorauthoritythanwhatwasderivedfromthemereconsentandacquiescenceoftheseveralStates.Intheordinarybusinessofthatgovernmentdefacto,whichtheoccasionhadcalledintoexistence,theydidwhateverthepublicinterestseemedtorequire,uponthesecurereliancethattheiractswouldbeapprovedandconfirmed.Inothercases,however,theycalledforspecificgrantsofpower;andinsuchcases,eachrepresentativeappliedtohisownStatealone,andnottoanyotherStateorpeople.Indeed,astheywerecalledintoexistencebythecoloniesin1775,andastheycontinuedinexistence,withoutanynewelectionornewgrantofpower,itisdifficulttoperceivehowtheycouldforma"generalornationalgovernment,organizedbythepeople."

TheywereelectedbysubjectsoftheKingofEngland;subjectswhohadnoright,astheythemselvesadmitted,toestablishanygovernmentwhatever;

andwhenthosesubjectsbecamecitizensofindependentStates,theygavenoinstructionstoestablishanysuchgovernment.Thegovernmentexercisedwas,asalreadyremarked,merelyagovernmentdefacto,andnofartherdejurethanthesubsequentapprovalofitsactsbytheseveralStatesmadeitso.

ThisbriefreviewwillenableustodeterminehowfarJudgeStoryissupportedintheinferenceshehasdrawn,inthepassageslastquoted.

Wehavereasontoregretthatinthese,asinmanyothers,hehasnotbeensufficientlyspecific,eitherinstatinghispropositionorincitinghisproof.Towhatpeopledoesheallude,whenhetellsusthatthe"firstgeneralornationalgovernment"wasorganized"bythepeople?"

ThefirstandeveryrecommendationtosenddeputiestoageneralCongresswasaddressedtothecoloniesassuch;inthechoiceofthosedeputieseachcolonyactedforitself,withoutminglinginanywaywiththepeopleorgovernmentofanyothercolony;andwhenthedeputiesmetinCongress,theyvotedonallquestionsofpublicandgeneralconcernbycolonies,eachcolonyhavingonevote,whateverwasitspopulationornumberofdeputies.

If,then,thisgovernmentwasorganizedby"thepeople"atall,itwasclearlythepeopleoftheseveralcolonies,andnotthejointpeopleofallthecolonies.AndwhereisJudgeStory"swarrantfortheassertion,thattheyacted"directlyintheirprimarysovereigncapacity,andwithouttheinterventionofthefunctionaries,towhomtheordinarypowersofgovernmentweredelegatedinthecolonies"?HeisinmostrespectsaclosefollowerofMarshall,andhecouldscarcelyhavefailedtoseethefollowingpassage,whichisfoundinanoteinthe168thpageofthesecondvolumeoftheLifeofWashington.SpeakingoftheCongressof1774,Marshallsays:

"ThemembersofthisCongressweregenerallyelectedbytheauthorityofthecoloniallegislatures,butinsomeinstancesadifferentsystemhadbeenpursued.InNewJerseyandMarylandtheelectionsweremadebycommitteeschosenintheseveralcountiesforthatparticularpurpose;andinNewYork,wheretheroyalpartywasverystrong,andwhereitisprobablethatnolegislativeact,authorizinganelectionofmemberstorepresentthatcolonyinCongress,couldhavebeenobtained,thepeoplethemselvesassembledinthoseplaces,wherethespiritofoppositiontotheclaimofParliamentprevailed,andelecteddeputies,whowereveryreadilyreceivedintoCongress,"

Herethegeneralruleisstatedtobe,thatthedeputieswereelectedbythe"coloniallegislatures,"andtheinstancesinwhichthepeopleacted"directlyintheirprimary,sovereigncapacity,withouttheinterventionoftheordinaryfunctionariesofgovernment,"aregivenasexceptions.

Andeveninthosecases,inwhichdelegateswereappointedbyconventionsofthepeople,itwasdeemednecessaryinmanyinstances,aswehavealreadyseen,thattheappointmentshouldbeapprovedandconfirmedbytheordinarylegislature,AstoNewYork,neitherherpeoplenorhergovernmenthadsofarlosttheirattachmenttothemothercountryastoconcuranymeasureofoppositionuntilafterthebattleofLexingtoninApril,1775;and,theonlyrepresentativeswhichNewYorkhadintheCongressof1774werethoseofacomparativelysmallportionofherpeople.Itiswellknown?and,indeed,JudgeStoryhimselfsoinformsus?thatthemembersoftheCongressof1775wereelectedsubstantiallyaswerethoseoftheprecedingCongress;sothattherewereveryfewofthecolonies,inwhichthepeopleperformedthatactintheir"primary,sovereigncapacity,"withouttheinterventionoftheirconstitutedauthorities.Itisoflittleconsequence,however,tothepresentinquirywhetherthedeputieswerechosenbythecoloniallegislatures,aswasdoneinmostofthecolonies,orbyconventions,aswasdoneinGeorgiaandsomeothers,orbycommitteesappointedforthepurpose,aswasdoneinoneortwoinstances,orbythepeopleinprimaryassemblies,aswasdoneinpartofNewYork.Allthesemodeswereresortedto,accordingastheoneortheotherappearedmostconvenientorproperineachparticularcase.But,whichevermodewasadopted,thememberswerechosenbyeachcolonyinandforitself,andweretherepresentativesofthatcolonyalone,andnotofanyothercolony,oranynationdefactoordejure.Theassertion,therefore,that"theCongressthusassembledexerciseddefactoanddejureasovereignauthority,notasthedelegatedagentsofthegovernmentdefactoofthecolonies,butinvirtueoftheoriginalpowersderivedfromthepeople,"is,tosaytheleastofit,verybold,inonewhohadundoubtedlyexploredallthesourcesofinformationuponthesubject.UntiltheadoptionoftheArticlesofConfederation,Congresshadno"originalpowers,"exceptonlyfordeliberationandadvisement,andclaimedno"sovereignauthority"whatever.Itwasanoccasional,andnotapermanentbody,oronerenewablefromtimetotime.Althoughtheydid,inmanyinstances,"exercisedefacto"apoweroflegislationtoacertainextent,yettheyneverheldthatpower"dejure,"byanygrantfromthecoloniesorthepeople;andtheactsbecamevalidonlybysubsequentconfirmationofthem,andnotbecausetheyhadanydelegatedauthoritytoperformthem.Thewholehistoryoftheperiodprovesthis,andnotasingleinstancecanbecitedtothecontrary.Thecourseoftherevolutionarygovernmentthroughoutatteststhefact,that,howeverthepeoplemayhaveoccasionallyacted,inpressingemergencies,withouttheinterventionoftheauthoritiesoftheirrespectivecolonialgovernments,theyneverlostsightofthefactthattheywerecitizensofseparatecolonies,andnever,evenimpliedly,surrenderedthatcharacter,oracknowledgedadifferentallegiance.InalltheactsofCongress,referencewashadtothecolonies,andnevertothepeople.Thatbodyhadnopowertoactdirectlyuponthepeople,andcouldnotexecuteitsownresolvesastomostpurposes,exceptbytheaidandinterventionofthecolonialauthorities.Itsmeasureswereadoptedbythevotesofthecoloniesassuch,andnotbytherule,ofmerenumericalmajority.Whichprevailsineverylegislativeassemblyofanentirenation.Thisfactaloneisdecisivetoprove,thatthememberswerenottherepresentativesofthepeopleofallthecolonies,forthejudgmentofeachcolonywaspronouncedbyitsownmembersonly,andnoothershadanyrighttomingleintheirdeliberations.What,then,wasthis"sovereignauthority?"Whatwasthenature,whattheextentofits"originalpowers?"

Fromwhat"people"werethesepowersderived?Ilookinvainforanswerstothesequestionstoanyhistoricalrecordwhichhasyetmetmyview,andhaveonlytoregretthatJudgeStoryhasnotdirectedmetobetterguides.CHAPTERIV.THENATUREANDEXTENTOFPOWERSEXERCISEDBYTHE

REVOLUTIONARYGOVERNMENTDIDNOTMAKETHECOLONIESONEPEOPLE.JudgeStory"sconclusionisnotbettersustainedbythenatureandextentofthepowersexercisedbytherevolutionarygovernment.Ithasalreadybeenstated,thatnooriginalpowersoflegislationweregrantedtotheCongressesof1774and1775;anditisonlyfromtheiractsthatwecandeterminewhatpowerstheyactuallyexercised.Thecircumstancesunderwhichtheywerecalledintoexistenceprecludedthepossibilityofanypreciselimitationsoftheirpowers,evenifithadbeendesignedtoclothethemwiththefunctionsofgovernment.Thecoloniesweresufferingundercommonoppressions,andwerethreatenedwithcommondangers,fromthemothercountry.Thegreatobjectwhichtheyhadinviewwastoproducethatconcertofactionamongthemselveswhichwouldbestenablethemtoresisttheircommonenemy,andbestsecurethesafetyandlibertiesofall.Greatconfidencemustnecessarilybereposedinpublicrulersundercircumstancesofthissort.Wemaywellsuppose,therefore,thattherevolutionarygovernmentexercisedeverypowerwhichappearedtobenecessaryforthesuccessfulprosecutionofthegreatcontestinwhichtheywereengaged;andwemay,withequalpropriety,supposethatneitherthepeoplenorthecolonialgovernmentsfeltanydispositiontoscrutinizeverynarrowlyanymeasurewhichpromisedprotectionandsafetytothemselves.Theyknewthatthegovernmentwastemporaryonly;thatitwaspermittedonlyforaparticularandtemporaryobject,andthattheycouldatanytimerecallanyandeverypowerwhichithadassumed.Itwouldbeaviolentandforcedinference,fromthepowersofsuchanagency,(forwasnotagovernment,althoughIhavesometimes,forconvenience,calleditso),howevergreattheymightbe,tosaythatthepeople,orStates,whichestablishedit,meanttherebytometheirdistinctivecharacter,tomergetheirdistinctivecharacter,tosurrenderalltherightsandprivilegeswhichbelongedtothemasseparatecommunities,andtoconsolidatethemselvesintoonenation.

Inpointoffact,however,therewasnothinginthepowers,exercisedbytherevolutionarygovernment,sofarastheycanbeknownfromtheiracts,inconsistentwiththeperfectsovereigntyandindependenceoftheStates.Thesewerealwaysadmittedinterms,andwereneverdeniedinpractice.

Sofarasexternalrelationswereconcerned,Congressseemstohaveexercisedeverypowerofasupremegovernment.Theyassumedtherightto"declarewarandtomakepeace;toauthorizecaptures;toinstituteappellateprizecourts;todirectandcontrolallnationalmilitaryandnavaloperations;

toformalliancesandmaketreaties;tocontractdebtsandissuebillsofcreditonnationalaccount."Thesepowerswerenot"exclusive,"however,asourauthorsupposes.Onthecontrary,troopswereraised,vesselsofwarwerecommissioned,andvariousmilitaryoperationswereconductedbythecolonies,ontheirownseparatemeansandauthority.TiconderogawastakenbythetroopsofConnecticutbeforetheDeclarationofIndependence;

MassachusettsandConnecticutfittedoutarmedvesselstocruiseagainstthoseofEngland,inOctober,1775;SouthCarolinasoonfollowedtheirexample.In1776,NewHampshireauthorizedherexecutivetoissuelettersofmarqueandreprisal.

Theseinstancesareselectedoutofmany,assufficienttoshowthatintheconductofthewarCongresspossessedno"exclusive"power,andthecolonies(orStates)retained,andactuallyasserted,theirownsovereignrightandpowerastothatmatter.Andnotastothatmatteralone,forNewHampshireestablishedpostoffices.Thewordsofourauthormay,indeed,importthatthepowerofCongressoverthesubjectofwarwas"exclusive"

onlyastosuchmilitaryandnavaloperationsasheconsidersnational,thatis,suchaswereundertakenbythejointpowerofallthecolonies;

and,ifso,heiscorrect.Butthecommaaftertheword"national"suggestsadifferentinterpretation.Atallevents,thefactswhichIhavementionedprovethatCongressexercisednopowerwhichwasconsideredasabridgingtheabsolutesovereigntyandindependenceoftheStates.

Manyofthosepowerswhich,forgreaterconvenience,wereentrustedexclusivelytoCongress,couldnotbeeffectuallyexertedexceptbytheaidoftheStateauthorities.ThetroopsrequiredbyCongresswereraisedbytheStates,andthecommissionsoftheirofficerswerecountersignedbytheGovernorsoftheStates.Congresswereallowedtoissuebillsofcredit,buttheycouldnotmakethemalegaltender,norpunishthecounterfeiterofthem.NeithercouldtheybindtheStatestoredeemthem,norraisebytheirownauthoritythenecessaryfundsforthepurpose.Congressreceivedambassadorsandotherpublicministers,yettheyhadnopowertoextendtothemthatprotectionwhichtheyreceivefromthegovernmentofeveryforeignnation.AmanbythenameofDeLongchampsenteredthehouseoftheFrenchMinisterPlenipotentiaryinPhiladelphia,andtherethreatenedviolencetothepersonofFrancisBarbeMarboise,SecretaryoftheFrenchLegation,ConsulGeneralofFrance,andConsulfortheStateofPennsylvania;

heafterwardsassaultedandbeathiminthepublicstreet.Forthisoffence,hewasindictedandtriedintheCourtofOyerandTerminerofPhiladelphia,andpunishedunderitssentence.Thecaseturnedchieflyuponthelawofnations,withreferencetotheprotectionwhichitaffordstoforeignministers.