[539]. “What they [the Convention] actually did, stripped of all fiction and verbiage, was to assume constituent powers, ordain a constitution of government and of liberty, and demand a plébiscite thereon over the heads of all existing legally organized powers. Had Julius or Napoleon committed these acts they would have been pronounced coups d’état.” Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law, Vol. I, p. 105.
[540]. Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 123.
[541]. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 89.
[542]. Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 137.
[543]. Farrand, Records, Vol. I, pp. 255 ff.; p. 283.
[544]. No. 40.
[545]. Harding, The Federal Constitution in Massachusetts, pp. 118–119.
[546]. The Massachusetts Centinel, January 2, 1788.
[547]. Batchellor, State Papers of New Hampshire, Vol. XXI, pp. 151–165; Documentary History of the Constitution, II, p. 141.
[548]. J. B. Walker, A History of the New Hampshire Convention, pp. 22 ff.