It was contended, on that occasion, on behalf of the state authority, that the powers of the General Government were delegated by the state governments, and that the Federal authority must be exercised in subordination to the states, who alone possessed supreme dominion. But the impossibility of sustaining such a proposition was fully and clearly demonstrated. It was admitted, indeed, that the Convention that framed the Constitution was elected by the state legislatures; but that instrument, when it came from the hands of the Convention, was a mere proposal, without actual obligation, or any pretension to it. It was reported to the then existing Congress, to "be submitted to a Convention of delegates to be chosen in each state by the people thereof, under the recommendation of its Legislature, for their assent and ratification." This mode of proceeding was adopted, and the proposed Constitution was accordingly submitted to the people, who acted upon it in the only manner in which they can act effectually and wisely on such subjects, by assembling in conventions. They assembled in their respective states, not merely from convenience, but from necessity. There existed no authority under the Confederation, as now exists under the Constitution, for calling a general convention; and if such authority had existed, that mode would not have been the proper one, in a case where the people were, in effect, to pass upon virtual amendments and partial abrogations of their state constitutions. They assembled and acted, therefore, in their several states, the people of each state thus exercising a separate and independent voice in the adoption of the Federal Constitution. But the measure they adopted did

not on that account cease to be the act of the people themselves, or become the measure of the state governments.

From these state conventions, then, the Constitution of the United States owes its whole authority. The instrument submitted to them purports on the face of it to proceed from "the people of the United States," to be “ordained and esablished" in their name; and is declared to be thus ordained and established “in order to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, and secure the blessings of liberty to them and their posterity." Now, if the people of the United States had never before acquired a common character, they assumed it then. The preamble to the Federal Constitution, containing these declarations, is an essential and necessary part of that instrument; and it not only enumerates the objects for which it was formed, but designates the parties by whom, and by whose authority alone, it was "ordained and established." The assent of the states in their sovereign capacities is implied, if not expressed, in calling their conventions, and thus submitting the new scheme of government to the people. But the people of each state were at perfect liberty to accept or reject it, and their act was final. The Constitution required not the affirmance of the state governments, nor could it be negatived by their act; but, when ratified by the people, it became of perfect obligation, and bound the

states.

It has, to be sure, been said that the people had already surrendered all their powers to the state governments, and had nothing more to give. But the question whether the people may

resume and modify the powers granted by them to the state or general governments for their own benefit, does not, surely, remain to be settled in this country. The same sovereign powers which had separately established the state governments, united with each other in forming a paramount sovereignty, and establishing a supreme government. For this purpose each yielded a portion of its individual sovereignty, and modified its state constitution, by rendering it subordinate to the Federal power. Their au thority to do this cannot for a moment be seriously doubted. Much more, indeed, might the legitimacy of the Federal Government have been questioned, had it been erected by the states to operate upon the individual citizens of the several states. The powers delegated to the state governments were to be exercised by themselves, not by a distinct and independent sovereignty erected by them. To the formation of a league such as the Confederation, the state governments were certainly competent. But when, "in order to form a more perfect union," and change that league into an effective government, clothed with high sovereign powers for national objects, and acting directly on the people as individuals, the necessity of referring it to the people themselves, and deriving its powers immediately from them, was universally felt and acknowledged; and the article of the Constitution which provides, as one of the modes for its amendment, a convention of the people of the United States, is conclusive as to the real character of the instrument, and the sense in which it must have been understood.

The Government of the Union, then, is em phatically and truly a government of the people.

In form and substance, it emanates from them; its powers are granted by them, and are to be exercised directly on them as individuals, and for their common benefit; and can be abrogated only by their consent. This government, however, is acknowledged by all to be a government of enumerated powers. The principle that it can only exercise the powers granted to it is admitted on all hands; but questions respecting the extent of the powers actually granted to it are, as we have seen, perpetually arising, and will probably continue to arise, as long as the system shall exist. In discussing these questions, the conflicting powers of the General and State Governments must be brought into view; and the supremacy of their respective laws, when in opposition to each other, must be settled by that power in the Federal Constitution which was created, among others, for this express purpose. Though limited in its powers, it would seem to result necessarily, from the nature of the General Government, that it should be supreme within its sphere of action. It is the government of all; its powers are delegated by all; it represents all; and it acts for all, and upon all. Though. any one state may be willing to control its operations, no other state is willing that other states should control them. The Nation, on those subjects upon which it can act at all, must necessarily bind its component parts. But the question is not left to mere reason; the people have in express terms decided it, by adopting the clause now under discussion, in conjunction with that requiring the oath to support the Federal Constitution to be taken by every state, as well as Federal officer. And yet we have witnessed an

attempt on the part of one of the states, not merely to assert and vindicate its own supremacy, in cases of collision with the authority of the Union, and to reject the control and jurisdiction of the SUPREME ARBITER on all constitutional questions, but by its own act to repudiate and nullify an act of Congress, which it took upon itself to pronounce to be contrary to the Constitution, and insisted that its decision was final. This monstrous claim it even pretended to reconcile with the doctrines of the Federal Constitution itself, founding it principally on the amendment which declares that "the powers not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people," and thereby assuming that the power exercised by Congress in passing the law in question was not delegated to the General Government, and that the power claimed by the state was not prohibited to it by the Federal Constitution, which were no other than the very points in contro

versy.

But this heresy was promptly met and ably refuted by the proclamation issued on the occasion by the President of the United States.* This admirable document, which confers more durable and honourable fame on the name of General Jackson than even the victory of New-Orleans, exhibits the true doctrines of the Constitution in strict conformity with those principles of construction which I have endeavoured to explain and enforce. In language becoming the dignity and responsibility of his station, the chief magis

* This celebrated state paper is well known to have been the production of the late Edward Livingston, then Secretary of State. -Vide Appendix E.