Francis X. Hennessy.
342 Madison Avenue,
New York City.
March 17th, 1923.
CONTENTS
| I. | Subjects Become Citizens | Page [1] |
| The American must know what a citizen is—Otherwise he will notremain a citizen—If the American citizen exists, there is noEighteenth Amendment—Americans of 1776 knew distinction between“citizen” and “subject”—While legally “subjects,” they hadgoverned themselves as “citizens”—Attempt to govern them as“subjects” causes Revolution—Declare American concept, no governmentinterference with human liberty unless “citizens” grantgovernment power—Make thirteen nations, each composed of citizens—Its“citizens,” in “conventions,” constitute each governmentby grant of power to interfere with human liberty—“Democracy”and “Republic” distinguished—Revolution to make American conceptAmerican law. | ||
| II. | The State Governments Form a Union of States | Page [17] |
| Revolution continues—Thirteen nations form league or federation ofstates—Members of federation act through respective attorneys-in-fact,state legislatures—Legislatures constitute federal governmentand grant its federal powers to govern states—Distinctionbetween legislatures’ power to make federal Articles and citizens’power to make national Articles under which men are governed—Citizens’power exercised in 1776 and legislatures’ power in1781—Revolution won, establishing American concept as Americanlaw. | ||
| III. | Americans Find the Need of a Single Nation | Page [25] |
| Federation of states unsatisfactory—General government, with onlyfederal power to govern states, not able to secure what wholeAmerican people want—They learn need of general governmentwith some enumerated national powers to govern men. | ||
| IV. | The Birth of the Nation | Page [29] |
| Philadelphia Convention assembles ostensibly to draft and proposepurely federal Articles—It drafts and proposes a “Constitution”with both national and federal powers—First Article is the constitutionof American national government because it grants allthe enumerated powers to interfere with human liberty of Americancitizens—Fifth and Seventh Articles relate to the grant ofnational power, though neither grant it—Other four Articlesneither grant nor relate to grant of national power—Fifth prescribesconstitutional mode for its future grant by American citizensin “conventions”—Also prescribes constitutional mode forfuture grant of federal power by state legislatures—Philadelphiaknows and decides that legislatures can never grant nationalpower and Articles are sent to “conventions” of “citizens,” as in1776—Whole American people become a nation—American citizenfirst exists on June 21, 1788, when American citizens maketheir only grant of national powers—States and their citizens andconstitutions and governments are made subordinate to citizensof America—These facts entirely forgotten in 1917. | ||
| V. | The Consent of the Governed | Page [55] |
| Education of personal experience, from 1775 to 1790, accuratelytaught science of government to average American—It taughthim that citizens only can grant government power to interferewith human liberty, though legislatures can grant federal powerto govern states—Modern leaders lack that practical educationand the accurate knowledge it taught the early American—Modernaverage American has sensed something curious about makingof Eighteenth Amendment—That he may understand whathe senses and know why there is no such Amendment, mustbriefly consider the Constitution. | ||
| VI. | The Conventions Give the Consent | Page [64] |
| In conventions, whole American people themselves make Constitution—“Feltand acknowledged by all” that legislatures could nevermake First Article because it constitutes government of men—Fromearly American, modern American learns that grant ofpower to govern men is the constitution of the government of men—BecauseFirst Article grants of that kind are enumerated, Americangovernment known as government of enumerated powers—Primalsecurity to human freedom that citizens, not legislatures,grant all power of that kind—Because this primal securityknown to early Americans, their “conventions” insist that Constitution(Tenth Amendment) declare that every power of thatkind not granted by American citizens remains with Americancitizens—Our own leaders have not known this security or understoodthat all ungranted powers of that kind were reserved byAmerican citizens to themselves. | ||
| VII. | People or Government?—Conventions orLegislatures? | Page [80] |
| American nation a society of men like any other society of men—Hereincalled America to distinguish it from federation of unitedstates which can make and are governed by federal parts of Constitution—Likeany society of men, America created by its originalhuman members in their “conventions”—Their knowledge ofthat fact becomes our knowledge—Supreme Court knows andstates it—Citizen of America distinct from state citizen, thoughthe same human being—Distinction vitally important, as SupremeCourt explains—Only citizens of America can grant new powerto interfere with their own human freedom—All original Americancitizens know this—Many explain it to us, Daniel Webstervehemently and clearly. | ||
| VIII. | Philadelphia Answers “Conventions, NotLegislatures” | Page [95] |
| Philadelphia knowledge and decision that legislatures of states, membersof the federation, cannot make Articles which create governmentpower to interfere with freedom of men, members ofthe nation—The decision, based on knowledge of basic Americanlaw, is embodied in Seventh Article and proposing Resolutionat Philadelphia in 1787—Human members of nation describedas “conventions” in Seventh Article—Story of SeventhArticle at Philadelphia—Madison asks searching question of anyAmerican who thinks possible any other decision than the Philadelphiadecision—Now educated with the early Americans, wegive the same answer as that of Philadelphia, while our leadershave given the opposite answer. | ||
| IX. | The Fifth Article Names Only “Conventions” | Page [110] |
| Philadelphia story of Fifth Article—Relates to future grants of nationalpower by American citizens but makes no grant—Meaningto “conventions” must be meaning now—Madison writes it atPhiladelphia, and he and many others from Philadelphia are in“conventions” who made it—Its Philadelphia story from May 29to September 10, 1787, one week before end of Convention. | ||
| X. | Ability of Legislatures Remembered | Page [115] |
| Fifth Article in last Philadelphia week—Philadelphia, previouslyconcentrated on its own First Article, has so far forgotten thatfuture Articles will probably be federal, which legislatures canmake—Wherefore, legislatures not yet mentioned in tentativeFifth Article—Madison and Hamilton recall probability that allfuture Articles will be federal and suggest a Fifth Article whichmentions “legislatures” as well as “conventions”—Full record ofSeptember 10, 1787, day of that Madison suggestion—Added mentionno support for modern error that Fifth Article a “grant”—Modernsignore that one supposed grantee is supposed grantorand that “grant” would make Americans “subjects”—In languageof Fifth Article, Philadelphia finds no suggestion of modernerror and the Article, with its added mention of legislatures,is passed without discussion—Having no suggestion of a“grant,” it is known at Philadelphia to be constitutional mode offuture exercise of the two existing but different abilities of“legislatures” and “conventions”—Madison, Wilson and Marshallon this fact—Full Philadelphia story of September 15, whenFifth Article finally considered—Defeat of Gerry’s motion tostrike out “by conventions in three-fourths thereof”—Modernerror of thinking and acting as if that motion had been carried. | ||
| XI. | Conventions Create Government of Men | Page [141] |
| “Conventions” of Seventh Article, making Constitution, know same“conventions” of Fifth Article to be themselves, the Americancitizens—Americans, in “conventions,” with American conceptthat government exists solely to secure individual and his freedom,read and make Fifth Article—Madison hits hard modernconcept of Bolshevist Russian and Eighteenth Amendment Americanthat human beings are made for kings or legislatures orpolitical entities—Conventions hear Madison explain Fifth Articleas prescribing procedure in which “conventions” can againassemble constitutionally to exercise their power and in which“legislatures” may act constitutionally in making future federalArticles—Recognize its constitutional mode as exact Revolutionarymode just followed by Madison and others at Philadelphiaand that future Congress should do exactly what Philadelphiadid and no more—Recognize Fifth Article settles how each “convention”vote shall count as one vote of American citizens andhow many “convention” votes shall be necessary and sufficient tomake a future Article which “conventions” of American citizensalone can make—Recognize words “in three-fourths thereof” afterword “conventions” most important words in Fifth Article anda great security to individual liberty—Average American nowsees why Eighteenth Amendment Tories seek escape from thatsecurity by asserting Constitution created supreme will independentof American citizens, i.e., will of state legislatures. | ||
| XII. | Two Articles Name “Conventions” | Page [171] |
| From 1775 to 1789, all Americans aim to secure individual welfare—Withthis one aim, “conventions” continue to read Fifth Articleand recognize statements of Fifth and Seventh, as to “conventions,”identical in nature—Recognize both ordain WHEN convention-madeArticles, granting power to interfere with individualfreedom, shall validly constitute government of Americancitizens—Recognize “conventions” of Seventh and Fifth as wholeAmerican people of Preamble—Recall ability of legislatures tomake federal Articles and know mention of “conventions” and“legislatures” grants no power to either—State “legislatures”lesser reservee and “conventions” of American citizens most importantreservee in Tenth Amendment—“Conventions” recognizetwo exceptions in Fifth Article, not as exceptions from powergranted therein, but as intentional refusal to provide a constitutionalmode in which existing ability may be exercised to do whatis mentioned in two exceptions—“Conventions” finish readingFifth Article and, from its clear language, know it is not a grantof power but a constitutional mode for the exercise of either oftwo existing powers, one limited and the other unlimited. | ||
| XIII. | Conventions Know “Conventions” are“the People” | Page [180] |
| Americans, in their “conventions,” explain and support and opposethe proposed Articles—Whether for or against the Articles, theirinvariable and clear statements confirm the “convention” knowledgethat the Fifth is not a grant of power either to themselves,“conventions,” or to the state “legislatures”—Conventionscheck Fifth Article mention of “legislatures” and “conventions”with statement that proposed constitution is “one federal andnational constitution”—Henry insists that proposed Articles makethe state legislatures weak, enervated and defenseless—“Abolishthe state legislatures at once”—Wilson admits that the Articlestake power from the state legislatures and give them no newpower—“The diminution is necessary to the safety and prosperityof the people”—Madison explains the importance of hiswords, “in three-fourths thereof,” after the word “conventions,”as requiring more than a mere majority of American citizens fornew interference with individual liberty—Hamilton states hisown conviction that amendments will be to the federal and notthe national part of the Constitution and emphasizes the legalnecessity that grants of national power must come from the peopleand not the legislatures—“Conventions” reluctant to giveeven the enumerated national powers of the First Article andinsist on the Tenth Amendment declaration that all other powerof that kind is reserved by themselves to themselves—“In theirhands it remains secure. They can delegate it in such proportions,to such bodies, at such times, and under such limitations,as they think proper”—In 1907, the Supreme Court states, whatthe “conventions” knew, that all powers not granted in the FirstArticle are reserved to the “conventions” of American citizens“and can be exercised only by them or on further grant fromthem”—The “conventions,” having secured the liberty of Americancitizens from all government interference except under theFirst Article grants, end their great work. | ||
| XIV. | Seventeen Articles Respect Human Freedom | Page [212] |
| Hamilton’s conviction, that all Amendments would be of the federalkind which legislatures can make, verified by the seventeenamendments prior to 1917—As Supreme Court has repeatedlyheld, the first ten Amendments merely declared what was alreadyin Constitution—A relevant and important declaration in theTenth is that the entire Constitution gives no power of any kindto state legislatures—Amazing modern Tory concept that theseten Amendments are an American Magna Charta or compactbetween a master government and its “subjects”—Madison andSupreme Court on the “impious doctrine” that Americans are“subjects”—Eleventh and Twelfth Amendments have naught todo with individual freedom—Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenthneither exercise nor create government power to interfere withhuman liberty—On the contrary, their purpose and effect are tomake human liberty universal—Sixteenth removes a federal limitation,in favor of the states, from a power the “conventions”gave to Congress—Seventeenth relates only to the election ofSenators—When 1917 opens, Congress has no power to interferewith individual liberty of American citizens which Congress didnot have in 1790—When 1917 opens, no legislatures, since July4, 1776, have dared to interfere with the individual liberty of theAmerican citizens outside the First Article grants or have daredto attempt to create a new power so to interfere—When 1917opens, we have not become “subjects” but still are citizens ofAmerica. | ||
| XV. | The Exiled Tory About to Return | Page [231] |
| When 1917 begins, relation of American citizen to all governmentsin America and relations of governments to one another justthe same as in 1790—American government can interfere withthe American citizen on matters enumerated in the First Article—Noother governments can interfere with him at all—The governmentof each state can interfere with its own citizens, exceptas the American Constitution forbids, on matters in which thecitizens of each state give their own government power to interfere—Nogovernment, either American government or state government,can get any new power of that kind except directlyfrom its own citizens—No government can get any power ofthat kind from other governments—New federal power of Americangovernment can be granted by members of federation, thestates, acting through their respective attorneys-in-fact, the statelegislatures—State legislatures are powerless to govern or tocreate power to govern American citizen—In these respects, supremacyof American citizens over all governments same in 1917as in 1790—1917 leaders did not know, what 1790 average Americanknew, that Revolution had ended forever Tory law thatgovernments are master and Americans are “subjects.” | ||
| XVI. | The Tory “Eighteenth Amendment” | Page [239] |
| December, 1917, closing month of America’s first year in World Warfor human liberty—American citizens have but one government,Congress, which can interfere with their human liberty in anymatter—Congress knows it cannot interfere by making the commandwhich is Section 1 of the Eighteenth Amendment—AmazingResolution in Senate that legislative governments of statecitizens be asked directly to interfere with human liberty ofAmerican citizen in matter not enumerated in First Article—Resolutionasks some state governments to give only Americangovernment a new enumerated power to interfere with freedomof American citizen, the first new power of that kind since June21, 1788—Some leaders question “wisdom” of Resolution—Noleader questions power of any governments (except Congress inthe enumerated First Article matters) to interfere with freedomof American citizen—No leader questions power of any or allgovernments to give a new enumerated power of that kind tothe only American government or to any government—No leaderknows that, in 1917 as in 1787 and in 1790, only the “conventions”of American citizens can make the command or the grantof power—House of Representatives adds absurdity to absurdity—Addsto Resolution that state governments, while interferingwith liberty of American citizen and granting only Americangovernment first new enumerated power so to interfere, shouldalso give themselves (the granting governments) the very powerthey assume to exercise over American citizens—Webb, explainingto the House his proposed change in Section 2 of the Amendment,states this to be the meaning and purpose of the change—ArticleIV contrasted with absurd modern error, as to meaningof Article V—That modern error is sole basis of Tory conceptthat any or all governments could make Articles like FirstArticle or supposed Eighteenth Amendment—Article IV guaranteesto citizens of each state that their state government shall berepublican, getting from them its every power to interfere withtheir individual freedom—Senate Resolution asks state governments,outside each state, to give each state government powerto interfere with the freedom of its own citizens—Congress of1917 acted on assumption that Article V meant to enable Congressto suggest any desired breach of the guarantee in theclosing words of Article IV. | ||
| XVII. | The Tory in the House | Page [254] |
| Despite our education with Americans from 1775 to 1790, in 1917,when Americans are at war for human liberty, the only Americangovernment recognizes other governments (the state legislatures)as an omnipotent Parliament with all American citizensas “subjects”—Volstead Act is only statute in America, interferingwith individual liberty, which does not even pretend tobe founded on direct grant of power from its citizens to the governmentwhich enacted it—Webb, in the House, states, “Wethought it wise to give both the Congress and the several states”new power to command the American citizen on this matter notenumerated in the First Article—His tribute to the state governments,as master governments of American citizen, exactlythe tribute paid by Lloyd George to the power of the WestminsterParliament over its “subjects”—Marshall, Hamilton, Madison,the Virginia Convention of 1788, the Supreme Court repeatedlyand even in 1907, flatly deny the concept of Webb and the 1917Congress—Concept of latter merely repeats mistake of governmentcounsel on which Supreme Court dwelt with emphasis in1907—Ignores most important factor in Tenth Amendment, “people”or “conventions”—From the early Americans, “Who but thepeople can delegate powers? What have the state governmentsto do with it?” and “How comes it, sir, that these state governmentsdictate to their superiors—to the majesty of the people?”—Webbreads to the House a Fifth Article in which “conventions”does not appear—Madison tells Webb and all of his Toryconcept, “These gentlemen must here be reminded of their error.They must be told that the ultimate authority resides in the peoplealone, and that it will not depend merely on the comparativeambition or address of the different governments, whether either,or which of them, will be able to enlarge its sphere of jurisdictionat the expense of the other”—Webb closes in the House withan eloquent appeal to every other follower of Mohammet. | ||
| XVIII. | The Tory in the Senate | Page [275] |
| Calm and sound reasoning of Federalist, advocating the real Constitution,contrasted with irrelevant personal abuse by those supportingthe imaginary new Constitution—Latter, because factsand law make their Tory concept absurd, revive “impious doctrineof Old World” that human beings were made for politicalentities and governments—Senator Sheppard and his eloquentclaim that American citizens, like other machinery, must bekept in good condition for their government owner—His “discovery”that the states, political entities, made the Constitutionof America, the nation of men—Story of America (from May29, 1787, to July, 1917) being a sealed book to him, he doesnot know that our Constitution is both federal and national—SupremeCourt, in early days and in 1907, and Webster andLincoln tell him his mistake—Not knowing the decision of Gettysburg,recorded at Appomattox, he chooses between Lord Northof 1775 and Calhoun and summons the latter to prove that theAmerican people did not make their Constitution and its grantof enumerated power to interfere with their individual freedom—Jefferson,Pendleton, Webster and many other Americans correctSheppard’s error of fact—As the American people of 1776accomplished their successful Revolution against government,may it not be the thought of Sheppard and other Tories that theEighteenth Amendment has been established by a successful revolutionof government against the people—Marshall again tellsus of the American day when the legal necessity “was felt andacknowledged by all,” that every power to interfere with humanliberty must be derived from the people in their “conventions”—Actingon the Congress proposal of 1917, governments of statecitizens command the American citizen and create a new governmentpower to interfere with his individual liberty—But nostatesman has yet told us how or when, prior to 1917, we became“subjects.” | ||
| XIX. | Are We Citizens? | Page [298] |
| Hamilton thinks it a prodigy that Americans, in “conventions,” voluntarilyconstitute the enumerated First Article government powersto interfere with their individual liberty—Marshall, in SupremeCourt, declares “conventions” to be the only manner inwhich they can act “safely, wisely and effectively” in constitutinggovernment of themselves, by making such grants—Whenproposed 1917 first new grant of that kind is supposedly made,American people and their “conventions” are completely ignored—Theproposers have a Fifth Article which does not mention“conventions”—The proposers have the old Tory concept, thatthe people are the assets of the state and that government is thestate—Still trying to find out how and when we became “subjects,”we expect to get information from the litigations of 1920—Weexpect great counsel, on one side, to urge the facts weknow—We fear that other great counsel will urge, in reply,some fact or facts which we have not been able to ascertain—Weare certain that there is no Eighteenth Amendment, if thefacts we have learned are all the facts—That we may listenintelligently to all the great counsel, we review some of the factswe have learned. | ||
| XX. | Lest We Forget | Page [307] |
| “The important distinction so well understood in America, between aconstitution established by the people and unalterable by thegovernment and a law established by the government and alterableby the government”—Our first glance at briefs of 1920 givesus hope that some modern leaders have acquired the knowledgeof Hamilton and his generation—We find, in one brief, in Marshall’swords, the Supreme Court statement of the fact that“conventions” of the people, not states or their governments, madethe Constitution with its First Article grants of power to interferewith human liberty—But this brief, to our amazement, is that ofthe foremost champion of the only other grant of that kind, theEighteenth Amendment, a grant made entirely by government togovernment—In 1920, seven litigations argued and reported underthe one title “The National Prohibition Cases”—Distinguishedcounsel appear for many clients, for the claimed omnipotent Parliamentof America, for the American government which weused to know as our supreme government, for a few state governmentswho did not wish to be part of the omnipotent Parliament,for those engaged in the lawful business of manufacturing,etc., the commodities named in the Eighteenth Amendment—Likethe human right to breathe, such manufacture, etc., was not theprivilege of a citizen—Both rights are among the human rightsmen have before they create nations and give governments powerto interfere with some or all of their human rights—Citizens ofAmerica, giving their only American government its enumeratedpowers, gave it no power to interfere with the human right mentionedin the new Amendment—Human rights never are privilegesof citizens—Citizens establish government to protect existinghuman rights—Only “subjects” get any rights or privileges fromgovernment—All early Americans knew these primal truths—Neitherthe French aristocrats, before French Revolution, norTories of 1776 in England or America knew them—EighteenthAmendment Tories do not know them—Madison (in 1789) andSupreme Court (in 1890) knew that commodities named in newAmendment are among those in which a human right “of trafficexists”—In litigations of 1920, no counsel appear on behalf ofthe human rights of American citizens—But we know that nodecision of our own Supreme Court, established to secure ourhuman rights, although the decision may settle disputes betweenother litigants, can change us from “citizens” into “subjects.” | ||
| XXI. | Briefs Ignore the American Citizen | Page [325] |
| No counsel knows all are discussing whether Americans, twelve yearsafter 1776, voluntarily became “subjects”—Common concept ofall that Fifth Article a “grant” of power to state governments(of state citizens) making them attorneys-in-fact for citizens ofAmerica—Discussion entirely as to extent of power “granted”—EighteenthAmendment concept that Fifth Article “grant” madesome governments of state citizens a supreme American Parliament,unrestrained master of every human right of all Americancitizens—Opposing concept that the Fifth Article “grant” madethose state governments a Parliament whose one limit is that itcannot interfere with the sovereignty of any political entity whichis a state—Both concepts ignore supremacy of nation of men overfederation of states—Both ignore dual nature of “one nationaland federal Constitution”—Both ignore “conventions” in Seventhand Fifth Articles as the citizens of the American nation—Bothignore that each state “legislature” is attorney-in-fact for thecitizens of its own state and that no legislatures are (exceptCongress in enumerated matters) attorneys-in-fact for the citizensof America in any matter—Our facts, brought from our educationwith the early Americans, all ignored by all counsel in the litigations—TheVirginia Convention itself and Lee, Pinckney, Hamilton,Madison, Wilson, Iredell and others state what all counselof 1920 entirely ignore. | ||
| XXII. | No Challenge to the Tory Concept | Page [335] |
| Eighteenth Amendment rests on imaginary Fifth Article “grant”making the state governments of state citizens attorneys-in-factfor the citizens of America, empowered to give away all humanrights of the citizens of America—“Grant” assumed in everybrief—No brief recognizes that one supposed “grantee” is supposed“grantor”—Or that each of two supposed “grantees” wasa competent maker of Articles (as proposed Articles were respectivelyfederal or national) before and when the “conventions”made the Fifth Article—Or that Philadelphia Convention knewand held “conventions” existing ability competent to make anyArticle and state legislatures, existing ability incompetent ever tomake Articles like First Article or Eighteenth Amendment—Orthat Tenth Amendment declares no power given to state “legislatures,”while all ability to make national Articles “reserved” to“conventions” of “the people” of America—No brief challengessheer assumption of Fifth Article “grant” or supports assumptionby any fact—Every brief, for or against Amendment, is based onthe sheer assumption—No brief knows that enumerated powers ofonly American government to interfere with human freedom canbe changed by no one save the citizens of America themselves intheir “conventions”—Madison’s tribute to these “conventions” inwhich “free inhabitants” constitute new government power overthemselves—Hamilton explains great danger to human liberty if“legislatures” or permanent government bodies could create suchnew government power—That knowledge of his generation confirmedby story of government-made supposed Eighteenth Amendment—Ourgratitude to that generation of men who (1776) madeit and (1788) left it impossible that governments could createnew government power to interfere with American human liberty—Ourregret that modern leaders have not known this great andimmutable protection to American liberty. | ||
| XXIII. | The Challenges That Failed | Page [350] |
| Supreme Court wisely writes no opinion in “National ProhibitionCases”—In each of four numbered paragraphs, Court states itsown negation of one challenge made to new Amendment—Allfour challenges are negatived in seventeen lines of statement—Firsttwo challenges trifling and purely technical—Third challengebased on rights of the citizens of some particular state—Fourthchallenge to “extent” of Fifth Article “grant” of powerby “conventions” to “conventions” and “legislatures”—This challengeasserts “grant” which advocates of Eighteenth Amendmentmust and cannot prove—Court negative amazingly accurate—Allcounsel have argued incessantly about “extent” of power “granted”by Fifth Article—Court negatives in statement which speaks ofpower “reserved” in Fifth Article—Concept of “grant” disappears—Courtknows what “conventions” knew, when they madeFifth Article, when they insisted on Tenth Amendment Declarationexpressly stating the distinct reservees of the two existingpowers “reserved” in Fifth Article—Supreme Court of Marshall’sday knows it and Supreme Court of 1907 knows it—“Citizen orSubject?”—Eighteenth Amendment answers “Subject”—Real Constitutionanswers “Citizen”—“Conventions” insisted on plain statementof correct answer—Counsel of 1920 do not know it—Theirfour challenges make plain that fact—All challenges based onerror that governments of state citizens are attorneys-in-fact forcitizens of America—In Virginia Convention and in SupremeCourt, Marshall explains that powers of state governments “proceednot from the people of America” but from the citizens of eachrespective state—No counsel of 1920 knows this important fact. | ||
| XXIV. | Governments Claim Americans as Subjects | Page [371] |
| Patrick Henry, opposing Constitution in the “conventions,” knows thatit takes power from the state legislatures and gives them nopower—All modern leaders “know” that it gives those legislaturesgreat power as attorneys-in-fact for the citizens of America—Manymodern leaders “know” that it makes those legislaturesan omnipotent Parliament over the citizens of America—No modernleaders remember 1781 and 1787 existing ability of the statelegislatures to make federal Articles or Articles not creatinggovernment power to interfere with human liberty—Commonmodern concept that Fifth Article is “grant” to these “legislatures”and to the very “conventions” which made the Fifth Article—Leadingbrief, against Amendment, more than fifty times admitsor asserts this imaginary and remarkable “grant”—Some extraordinaryconcepts of our American institutions in briefs—In afamous opinion, Marshall explains a fact and on it bases theentire decision of the Supreme Court—The fact itself is that theConstitution granted no power of any kind to the state legislatures—Nobrief knows or urges this fact or any of the facts welearned in the “conventions,” the facts on which we base ourchallenge to the Eighteenth Amendment concept that we are“subjects”—Briefs for the Amendment examined to find out whywe are supposed to be “subjects”—Amazing claim that, whengovernments alone change the national part of the Constitution,Supreme Court has no power even to consider whether governmentsin America can make a change in the enumerated powersgiven to their own government by the citizens of America—RemarkableTory concept that the number of Senators from eachstate is the only thing in America immune from governmentinvasion, if enough governments combine—Indignation of Americancitizen changes to mirth when he realizes this concept to beonly basis of thought that he is a “subject” or that there is anEighteenth Amendment—American citizen, seeking to find (in thebriefs for the Amendment) what happened, between 1907 and1917, to make him a “subject,” startled to hear the answer,“Nothing”—Citizen’s amusement increased on learning, in samebriefs, that whole American people, in Constitution which expresslydeclares it gives no power to state governments, madethose governments of state citizens irrevocable and omnipotentattorneys-in-fact for the citizens of America—Amusement increasedby finding that main champion of Tory concept quotesMarshall’s Supreme Court story of the making of the Constitution,but omits, from the quotation, the paragraph in which Marshallpoints out that everyone knew why the “legislatures” could notmake and only the “conventions” could make the national FirstArticle, with its grant of enumerated power to interfere withhuman liberty—Curiosity added to mirth on finding this briefecho Madison’s own knowledge that his Fifth Article containsnothing but “procedural provisions,” while brief bases its entirecontention on mere assertion that Fifth Article is greatest grantof power ever made by free men to government. | ||
| XXV. | Citizen or “Eighteenth Amendment”? | Page [397] |
| Congress is only legislature with any power of attorney from thecitizens of America—At very beginning and very end of originalConstitution, citizens of America expressly so state—All briefs of1920 based on asserted assumption denying those two statementsand insisting Fifth Article is “grant” to governments of statecitizens—Briefs for new Amendment assert “grant” made governmentsof state citizens omnipotent master of everything in America(including all human rights) save number of Senators from eachstate—On this Tory concept depends entirely existence of EighteenthAmendment—Tory concept being absolute myth, Amendmentdisappears—Amusing to find Tory briefs for Amendmentwith American citations and quotations which annihilate Toryconcept—Unconscious humor of Wheeler surpasses “Comic Blackstone”—Torylegions, fighting under crescent of Mohammet, claimto be American and Christian crusaders—Americans would haveremained “subjects” if Parliament, passing the Stamp Act, hadsaid: “You subjects must obey this command we make but, makingit, we do not legislate”—“Statement” that citizens of America universallydemanded this sole Amendment which attempts to changethe First Article enumerated powers—“Proof” that 4742 Torymembers of governments of state citizens said “Yes” to thechange—Jefferson and Madison tell us that concentration of allpower in legislatures “is precisely the definition of despotic government,”that 173 “despots would surely be as oppressive asone,” and that “an elective despotism was not the government wefought for”—Calhoun contended one state might defy supremewill of citizens of America—Tories for Amendment go far beyonddoctrine finally repudiated by Gettysburg—On Tory concept thatwe are “subjects” of omnipotent government, assert that somegovernments of state citizens may dictate, in all matters of humanright, what the citizens of America may and may not do—Echofrom “conventions” which made Fifth Article, “How comes it,sir, that these state governments dictate to their superiors, to themajesty of the people?” | ||
| XXVI. | The American Citizen Will Remain | Page [416] |
| Supreme Court holds American people, “for most important purposes,”chose to be one nation, with only one government of the FirstArticle enumerated powers to interfere with human liberty—America,the nation of men, and United States, the subordinatefederation of states—Tories for new Amendment must prove thatAmerican people, as one “important” purpose, meant that governmentsof state citizens could interfere with every human right ofAmerican citizens—Reserved rights and powers of American citizensare entirely at their own direct disposal, for exercise orgrant, “despite their legislatures, whether representing the statesor the federal government”—American citizen must know this ofhis own knowledge or his human freedom will disappear—Emmettand Webster and their generation knew it—Madisonwrites Fifth Article and states exactly what it is to the “conventions”which made it—Hughes unable to begin his Tory argumentfor new Amendment without adding to that Madison statementwhat Madison pointedly did not say—Senate now about to repeat1917 blunder that governments of state citizens have aught to dowith altering the national part of the American Constitution,which part is within the exclusive control of the citizens ofAmerica themselves—“Conventions” are the people—“Legislatures”are governments—“Citizen or Subject?”—Supreme Courtanswer certain—Court’s history and traditions show Americanconcept of Hamilton that this Court bulwark of American citizenagainst government usurpation of power to interfere with humanliberty—Webster forecast Court decision on new and ToryAmendment, answering “Citizen or Subject?”—All Americansonce knew same correct answer to same question by Pendleton inVirginia Convention of 1788, “Who but the people can delegatepower? What have the state governments to do with it?” | ||
| APPENDICES | ||
| I. | The Original Constitution of the United States | Page [445] |
| II. | The Resolution Which Proposed the Constitutionto the Conventions of the People ofAmerica | Page [458] |
| III. | The First Seventeen Amendments to the Constitution | Page [460] |
| IV. | The Alleged Eighteenth Amendment | Page [465] |
| V. | The Nineteenth Amendment | Page [466] |
CITIZEN OR SUBJECT?
CHAPTER I
SUBJECTS BECOME CITIZENS
The average American of this generation does not understand what it means to be a citizen of America. He does not know the relation of such a citizen to all governments in America. He does not know the relations of those governments to one another. If this ignorance should continue, the citizen of America would disappear. The American would become again a subject, as he was when the year 1776 opened.
The supposed Eighteenth Amendment is not in the Constitution unless the American already is a subject.
It is vital to every individual interest of the average American that he should know these things which he does not know. Happily for him, his ignorance is not as that of the public leaders of his generation. Their concept of the American and his relation to governments in America is one which contradicts the most definitely settled and clearly stated American law. On the other hand, the average American merely has a mind which is a blank page in these matters. As a result, it is the greatest danger to his individual interest that their concept largely guides his attitude in public affairs of the utmost moment to him.