And again, at another stage of the debate, the same patriotic opponent of the Constitution declared succinctly:—
"The question turns, Sir, on that poor little thing, the expression, 'We, the people,' instead of the States of America."[15]
In the same convention another patriotic opponent of the Constitution, George Mason, following Patrick Henry, said:—
"Whether the Constitution is good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers that it is a National Government, and no longer a Confederation."[16]
But against all this opposition, and in the face of this exposure, the Constitution was adopted, in the name of the people of the United States. Much, indeed, was left to the States; but it was no longer in their name that the government was organized, while the miserable pretension of State "sovereignty" was discarded. Even in the discussions of the Federal Convention Mr. Madison spoke thus plainly:—
"Some contend that States are sovereign, when, in fact, they are only political societies. The States never possessed the essential rights of sovereignty. These were always vested in Congress."
Grave words, especially when we consider the position of their author. They were substantially echoed by Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, afterwards Vice-President, who said:—
"It appears to me that the States never were independent. They had only corporate rights."
Better words still fell from Mr. Wilson of Pennsylvania, known afterwards as a learned judge of the Supreme Court, and also for his Lectures on Law:—
"Will a regard to State rights justify the sacrifice of the rights of men? If we proceed on any other foundation than the last, our building will neither be solid or lasting."