of its defined and specified ends. It is a government within its own sphere, which is a limited one, and acts with governmental power; because the power delegated from the principals in the league, is governmental, and to be employed for governmental ends; and would be so employed by each of the parties to the contract for its own behoof, if not lodged in the hand of the federal agent. The Federal government is not a party to the compact. The compact is between the sovereign States, and was constituted before this government existed.— The powers belonging to it are defined by the constitution, and beyond the specified limits it may not go. It belongs to the confederated States to modify these powers, enlarging, abridging, or altering them, as their interest and their duty may require; and for this they have provided in the instrument itself. In all doubtful cases of moment, to avoid the charge of rashness, it becomes the agent before proceeding to act, to consult and take advice of the principals.

You already know, that the objects about which the Federal government is authorized to act, are comparatively few, and particularly limited. These chiefly refer to exterior relations among the States themselves, and especially to foreign nations. In reference to the States, it partakes of the nature of a board of arbitrators, appointed by mutual consent, to settle differences that may arise among the parties, invested with authority to carry its decision into effect. This is a peculiar characteristic, distinguishing it from other treaties of sovereign powers. As regards foreign states, it presents a national front. The States in union have judged it proper to know, and be known to nations abroad, by their federal agents alone. The powers delegated are such as can be more advantageously employed by the agent than by the principals separately; but few or none of them belong to the first, nearest, and most important objects of governmental regard. All the powers of the Union and their exercise, we have seen are incidental to a civil state, rather than essential to its constitution and existence.Not so, however, with the States themselves. They have their own constitutions, legislatures, courts, and magistrates, chief and subordinate; and each possesses all those residuary powers, upon which the governments may draw for the public advantage. As subjects of governmental care, you will recollect, they have before them the interests of personal lib

erty, property, reputation, morals, and religion; and upon all of these may act as the public good requires. These residuary powers, they have reserved to themselves, and upon them the federal agent may not encroach.

You will appreciate another consideration upon this sub-` ject. If you take up any one of the State constitutions, you will find it marked by some very striking political defects; defects that should not belong to a complete system regulating the whole policy of a state: it may not declare war, form a commercial treaty, or coin money. Turn to the federal constitution and you will find it still more defective, in the provisions of a complete government. It is conversant, as before noticed, only about a comparatively few things, incidental, though important, to civil society, while it is silent, or restricted, in all that is of first interest, most important, and most extensive, in a well framed government. Should you ask me-Is the federal government a full exemplification of God's ordinance for civil rule? My reply, at once, would be; No: The Federal Union presents but few features of God's ordinance of civil magistracy; and it is defective in provisions of the first necessity. I ask you in turn-Was it intended to exemplify a complete magistratical system? Your reply will be;-No. Do not, then, exact more from it, than it was intended to afford.

The whole mystery of this is explained, by bringing the Federal government into union with each of the state governments. Then you have a complete system. The state supplies what the federal wants, and the federal makes up the deficiencies of the government of the state. The Federal government is equally related to each of the States; and it was the pleasure of each of these to constitute the confederation its agent, in transacting a portion of its business; that portion which belonged to it in common with the other confederates, or which was exterior; but reserving to itself the management of the estate at home. The confederation is destitute of many moral attributes which belong to a well constituted governGo to the state and you find them in a good measure supplied. Bring the two together to make a whole, and you have before you the system of government to which the citizen is pledged. Much mistake must prevail from not viewing the

ment.

In this view of the subject we subscribe to the assertions of Chief Justice Marshall, from whose opinions few will dissent without some hes

subject as it really is; and false conclusions must be drawn when the whole truth is not in evidence before the mind.

It is admitted, I believe, that if the government of the United States be a Federal and not a consolidated government, it would be unreasonable and unjust, to expect in it those minute characteristics, or from it those special acts which belong to a full national authority. If the remarks already made, be not sufficient to establish its federate character, in its aspect at home, you will bear with me while I adduce a few of the many considerations that carry, on that point, conviction to my own mind. I cannot, indeed, view the subject in any other light, and the deductions legitimately flowing from it, I am compelled to admit. You will not misapprehend my ground: While the government of the United States is, within its delegated limits, a sovereign power, sustained by the states, in relation to its appropriate objects, it is, nevertheless, Federal; the several States of the confederacy retaining their fundamental principles of sovereignty, with all the residuary powers thereto pertaining.-I shall do little more than briefly state a part, and a small part only, of the matter of proof, leaving to you the task of its rational application.

I. The great and most important public acts of the states, previous to the Federal convention, furnish my first proof of their sovereignty, and of the Federal character of the government of the Union.

These acts are the Declaration of Independence, the old Confederation, and the Acknowledgement of Independence by the government of Great Britain. You have only to turn to the memorable deed of the 4th of July, 1776, to see the proof of sovereignty in each state at that day. The colonies were. represented in congress, and, by the fact of their respective itation. He says-"The States are one great empire-for some purposes sovereign; for some purposes subordinate.' And again-" The national and state systems are to be regarded as one whole." An able jurist of Pennsylvania, Mr. Rawle, remarks-"The Constitution of the United States is to a certain extent, incorporated into the constitutions of the several states by the act of the people." It is equally true that the constitutions of the several states are, to a certain extent, incorporated into the Federal Constitution. Between them there is a mutual recognition. The defects of the one are sup plied from the fulness of the other. Yet they are distinct. Mr. Taylor, of Caroline, contemplates the subject in a similar light-" Neither the federal nor state," says he, "are perfect governments, both being only invested as distinct and checking political departments, with limited portions or dividends of civil and political power.'

representatives appearing on that floor, in a common cause, and without any other bond, they were United Colonies.The declaration of independence runs-They are, and of right ought to be, FREE and INDEPENDENT States. Two years subsequent to this, it was found necessary to enter into a more perfect union. This gave occasion to the "Articles of Confederation," which commence by declaring that "each state retains its SOVEREIGNTY, freedom, and independence. At the conclusion of the war, the treaty in which their independence is acknowledged, enumerates the states by name, and declares them to be free, SOVEREIGN, and independent States." This was in accordance with their own declaration, when they formed the confederacy. Although they entered into a close union, they still remained sovereign powers. This state of things continued until 1788. If the States retained their sovereignty then, and that they did so is not disputed, the government of the Union is Federal, and not National. It was formed by the people of the States, for the States in union.

II. Another proof is found in the instructions given by the several States, to their delegates in the Federal Convention of 1787.

You will recollect that the deputies of 1786, at Annapolis, recommended by resolution, a convention of delegates from the States, to modify the frame of government. It has been remarked that the language and ideas of that resolution, are confused and somewhat contradictory. It speaks of forming both a federal and national government. It is remarkable that of the twelve States which commissioned delegates, not one of them authorized its agents to form a national, but all of them expressly mentioned a federal constitution or government.This, Mr. Taylor, of Virginia, with great probability supposes, was not without design. A national government had its advocates at that day; but as this must have been established at the expense of state sovereignty, it was unpopular. To counteract the tendency of the inadvertent or dubious terms, national government, used in the Annapolis resolution, the States were particular in excluding the epithet national, and employing the term federal, in their instructions. If, then, the delegates acted in good faith toward their constituents, they formed a federal and not a national constitution. That they did so will appear in the sequel.

III. The ACTINGS of the Convention of 1787, furnish farther proof upon the subject.

You have in your library the "Secret Debates of the Convention," and to the "Journal" you have access. I refer you to those documents, where you will find among the evidences of a prevailing opposition to a national government:

1. The rejection of Mr. Pinckney's motion to authorize a national legislature to put a veto upon state laws.*

2. The unanimous expunction of the terms "national government," from the first of Mr. Randolph's resolutions, substituting for them, "government of the United States."+

3. The declaration of Mr. Lansing and others, that they had no power to form a consolidated government.‡

4. The rejection of the proposal to give various undefined powers to the Union, under the imposing idea of being 'for the public good."

66

5. The language employed by the convention in submitting the constitution to congress, to be laid before the states. It was presented as a constitution of a Federal government; possessing delegated powers for federal purposes. The rejection of the term national, the adoption of that of States, the refusal of all the provisions calculated to consolidate the government, which were proposed by the advocates of consolidation, and the perfect understanding of the subject by the members, all go to prove how abhorrent to the convention was the idea of a national government.

IV. The principles upon which the States proceeded in adopting the Constitution, and in modifying the Union under it, prove the Federal character of their relation.

1. We have seen that their delegates in convention, were authorized to do no more than to frame the plan of a federal government.

2. When the convention had finished their labours, they, through a specified channel, laid the result before their constituents, for approbation or rejection.

3. The particular States, as sovereign powers, met in convention to pass upon the instrument. In this they acted in their highest character of sovereignty; and no obligation,

*Yates, p. 122. Idem, p. 108. +Id. 142. Letter to Congress.

SJour. of Aug. 18th.