ing object throughout, and the object of the Union under it, to preserve, and to perpetuate, as far as possible by human agency, these separate and several States so established? Is not this apparent from the whole work? Is it not apparent from the face of the instrument, from its Alpha to its Omega? In other words, is not the Constitution, upon its face, as made, without looking into the subsequent amendments, Federal in its every feature, from beginning to end?

What say you?

PROF. NORTON. I will postpone what I have to say until you get through.

MR. STEPHENS. Well, then, the next step with me, after this examination of the Constitution itself, will be to look into the action of the several States upon it, and see whether they considered it as uniting and consolidating the whole people of the country, over which it was to extend, into one Nation, or whether they considered it, as Washington did, a consolidation of the Union of States, joined together by it, into one Great Confederated Republic.

COLLOQUY VI.

TIE ACTION OF THE SEVERAL STATES ON THE CONSTITUTION-DEBATES IN THE SEVERAL STATE CONVENTIONS-COMMENTS THEREON.

MR. STEPHENS. The next step, then, in our inquiry and investigation, will be to look into the action of the several States upon this Constitution, when it was submitted to their Legislatures, by the Congress, as requested by the Convention, and see how it was understood by them, and what construction was put upon it by its supporters and advocates. Whether it was considered by them as a surrender of the Sovereignty of the several States, or simply as a new Constitutional Compact, between the States, upon the same Federal basis, as the former Articles of their Union had been.

We will take them up in their order of ratification. In each case, looking first into the the action of the State, and, secondly, into the debates, where any have been preserved, as part of the res gesta, showing the understanding of the States, in their ratification, as appears from the record.

FIRST, DELAWARE.

The Legislature of the State of Delaware called a Con vention of her people to consider the Constitution, and take action upon it, according to the request of Congress. In the Convention of this State, there seems to have been no division and no discussion. At least, none of the

debates in that body, if any were had, have been preserved. Here is the action of the Convention.

"We, the Deputies of the People of the Delaware State, in Convention met, having taken into our serious consideration the Federal Constitution, proposed and agreed upon by the Deputies of the United States, in a General Convention, held at the City of Philadelphia, on the seventeenth day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, have approved, assented to,- ratified, and confirmed, and by these presents do, in virtue of the power and authority to us given, for and in behalf of ourselves and our constituents, fully, freely, and entirely approve of, assent to, ratify, and confirm, the said Constitution.

"Done in Convention, at Dover, this seventh day of December, in the year aforesaid, and in the year of the Independence of the United States of America, the twelfth."*

In this very act of ratification, we see it styled, by the Sovereign people of Delaware, "The Federal Constitution." Indeed, no one can doubt, for a moment, from the Course of her Delegates, in the Philadelphia Convention, that the People of Delaware understood the Constitution, as they here style it, to be Federal in its character, and that the Sovereignty of the State was still retained.

SECOND, PENNSYLVANIA.

The next State in order was Pennsylvania. In this, as in the case of Delaware, let us look first into the action of the State and then into the debates, as far as we have them, to see what light they throw upon this action. First, then, the action of the Convention is in these words.

*Elliot's Debates, vol. i, p. 319.

"In the Name of the People of Pennsylvania. "Be it known unto all men, that we, the Delegates of the people of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in General Convention assembled, have assented to and ratified, and by these presents do, in the name and by the authority of the same people, and for ourselves, assent to and ratify the foregoing Constitution for the United States of America. Done in Convention at Philadelphia, the twelfth day of December, in the year cf our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, and of the independence of the United States of America the twelfth. In witness whereof, we have hereunto subscribed our names.'

No allusion in this is made to the character of the instrument or of the understanding of the members or the Convention of it, farther than their styling it a "Constitution for the United States of America." That is a Constitution for States United, and not for the whole mass of the people of these States in the aggregate. This of itself is quite enough to show that they considered it Federal or Federative in its character!

But we are not left in doubt or to inference on this . point. The debates in the Convention of Pennsylvania have been in part preserved. The speeches of Mr. Wilson, at least, who had been in the Federal Convention that framed the Constitution, and who was also in the State Convention that ratified it, we have. These, it is true, are all of these debates that we have, but they throw much light upon the subject.

Mr. Wilson, recollect, was one of the ablest and most zealous of the Nationals in the Federal Convention. But when their plan failed, he, as Hamilton, Morris, King,

* Elliot's Debates, vol. i, p. 319.

and Madison, gave the Constitution agreed upon, Lis warm support. What he said, therefore, in the State Convention, touching the character, or nature of the Constitution, which was finally agreed upon, is entitled to great weight, and particularly all his disclaimers, as to its being a Consolidation of the whole people of the country into one single grand National Republic. Let us, then, in the second place, see what was his judgment of it, as given to the Pennsylvania Convention. In opening the deliberations of that body, he said :*

"The system proposed, by the late Convention, for the Government of the United States, is now before you. Of that Convention, I had the 'honor to be a member. As I am the only member of that body, who has the honor to be also a member of this, it may be expected that I should prepare the way for the deliberations of this Assembly, by unfolding the difficulties, which the late Convention was obliged to encounter; by pointing out the end which they proposed to accomplish; and by tracing the general principles which they have adopted for the accomplishment of that end."

* * *

"A very important difficulty arose from comparing the extent of the country to be governed, with the kind of Government, which it would be proper to establish in it. It has been an opinion, countenanced by high authority, 'that the natural property of small States is to be governed as a Republic; of middling ones, to be subject to a monarchy; and of large empires, to be swayed by a despotic prince; and that the consequence is, that, in order to preserve the principles of the established Government, the State must be supported in the extent it has acquired; and that the spirit of the State will alter in proportion

* Elliot's Debates, vol. ii, p. 418.