To have transferred sovereignty
from the people to a Government would have been to have fought the
battles of the Revolution in vain--not for the freedom and independence
of the States, but for a mere change of masters. Such a thought or
purpose could not have been in the heads or hearts of those who molded
the Union, and could have found lodgment only when the ebbing tide of
patriotism and fraternity had swept away the landmarks which they
erected who sought by the compact of union to secure and perpetuate the
liberties then possessed. The men who had won at great cost the
independence of their respective States were deeply impressed with the
value of union, but they could never have consented, like "the base
Judean," to fling away the priceless pearl of State sovereignty for any
possible alliance.
[Footnote 74: "Rebellion Record," vol. i, Documents, p. 213.]
[Footnote 75: "Federalist," No. xliv.]
[Footnote 76: "Federalist," No. xxvii.]
[Footnote 77: "Congressional Debates," vol. ix, Part I, p. 565.]
[Footnote 78: Ibid., p. 566.]
[Footnote 79: Sir Francis Palgrave, quoted by Mr. Calhoun,
"Congressional Debates," vol. ix, Part I, p. 541.]
CHAPTER X.
A Recapitulation.--Remarkable Propositions of Mr. Gouverneur
Morris in the Convention of 1787, and their Fate.--Further
Testimony.--Hamilton, Madison, Washington, Marshall, etc.--Later
Theories.--Mr.
Pages:
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267