"
In New Jersey the ratification, which took place on the 18th of
December, was unanimous. This is no less significant and instructive
than the unanimity of Delaware, from the fact that the New Jersey
delegation, in the Convention that framed the Constitution, had taken
the lead in behalf of the federal, or State-rights, idea, in opposition
to that of nationalism, or consolidation. William Patterson, a
distinguished citizen (afterward Governor) of New Jersey, had introduced
into that Convention what was known as "the Jersey plan," embodying
these State-rights principles, as distinguished from the various
"national" plans presented. In defending them, he had said, after
calling for the reading of the credentials of delegates:
"Can we, on this ground, form a national Government? I fancy
not. Our commissions give a complexion to the business; and can
we suppose that, when we exceed the bounds of our duty, the
people will approve our proceedings?
"We are met here as the deputies of _thirteen independent,
sovereign States, for federal purposes. Can we consolidate their
sovereignty and form one nation_, and annihilate the
sovereignties of our States, who have sent us here for other
purposes?"
Again, on a subsequent day, after stating that he was not there to
pursue his own sentiments of government, but of those who had sent him,
he had asked:
"Can we, _as representatives of independent States_, annihilate
the essential powers of independency? Are not the votes of this
Convention taken on every question under the idea of
independency?"
The fact that this State, which, through her representatives, had taken
so conspicuous a part in the maintenance of the principle of State
sovereignty, ratified the Constitution with such readiness and
unanimity, is conclusive proof that, in her opinion, that principle was
not compromised thereby.
Pages:
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194