The republic of republics; or, American federal liberty

Front matter

CORNELL

UNIVERSITY

LIBRARY

Preface

' I "HE theory of this work is precisely that upon ■which the -'- anti-slavery sentiment of the country based itself, in opposing the extension of slavery, the fugitive slave law, and, indeed, slavery itself; while it supports the action (except nullifying), of those states which have from time to time defended themselves agaiiist federal* excesses.

The author is one who never held or wished for office ; who belongs to no party ; and who pleads to save the palladium of all his blessings — his commonwealth.

In 1865, Andrew Johnson, filled with the motives and feelings of the war, and surrounded by detectives, spies, Stantons, and Holts, believed Davis to be a traitor, who sought the destruction of " the government," starved federal prisoners at Andersonville and elsewhere, and procured Lincoln's death.

It was then that he uttered the celebrated threat of " making treason odious by hanging traitors " ; and for a time, even if it was not contemplated, it was feared that a military commission would be used as the machinery of trial and punishment. But, as Davis and the other leading confederates were prisoners of war, and protected by the jus gentmm, the policy seemed to be adopted of turning them over to the civil authorities, for trial

— if conviction could be assured ; or for other disposal, as hereafter indicated.

The North was full of bitterness and vengeful spirit. Sentiments like the following, were heard from many leaders : " Eebels have no rights but to be hung " ; " The army has convicted

— only execution remains." But the soberer judgment of preiv PREFACE.

dominant men was more humane, and the moral sense of the country and the world favored a trial of some sort, though few comparatively could patiently contemplate the chances of acquittal. The following from the New York Times shows the prevailing views and feelings, and, at the same time, the danger of losing the great principles involved. Advocating civil trial, and presuming it would come, that journal said : " We have no fear that Jeff Davis will be acquitted on the merits of the case, as they will be expounded by the chief justice, who will try him. ... If Davis is convicted, the constitution, as understood by the loyal people of the land, will be vindicated, and the supremacy of the national authority forever established in law, as well as fact."

Presuming that there must be a large class of Sewards, Chases, Greeleys, Gerrit Smiths, Bateses, Everetts, TrumbuUs, Stansberrys, etc., who, as peace grew older and reflection came, would arise and influence public opinion, the author sent from London, in the summer of 1865, the first edition of this work, in the shape of a "protest" against the trial of the confederate chiefs by military commission ; and an argument — which was really that of the fathers, the author merely compiling — showing that the law and the testimony were in their favor, and that they could not be convicted even by a court and jury. It was sent to all the conspicuous men in and out of the administration.

The following telegram to the Philadelphia Ledger, is selected to show the estimate in which the work was held by some in Washington : " A most important argument has been received by the president from London, in which are set forth the reasons why Davis cannot be convicted in any court, of the crime of treason," etc., etc. Concerning it, Mr. Charles O'Conor wrote the author, Dec. 10, 1865 : " If upon the numerous points that any lawyer can readily see in the case, I had so admirably prepared and overwhelmingly conclusive a brief as the protest, my task [of defending Davis] would be slight indeed." And the Mobile Register noticed it as follows : " This treatise is an extraordinary work, considering that it is written by an English lawyer. It exhibits profound acquaintance with the history and philosophy of the constitution."

PREFACE. V

It should be explained, en passant, that the work purported to be the monograph of P. C. Centz, Barrister.

Some have thought, perhaps erroneously, that the president and his advisers were, by it, induced to pause, and convoke leading jurisconsults ; who actually met, and after much study and thought, reported that Davis must be civiUy tried if at all ; but that probably he could not be convicted. Among the statements on this subject, the following is selected from a most interesting letter, written in Richmond to the Norfolk Virginian, and published in 1873 : —

" Another event of great historical interest, in which Judge Clifford participated, was the solemn consultation of a small number of the ablest lawyers of the North, at Washington, a /ew months after the war, upon the momentous question as to whether the federal government should commence a criminal prosecution against Jefferson Davis for his participation and leadership in the war "of secession. In this council, which was surrounded at the time with the utmost secrecy, and which has never yet been described, was U. S. attorney-general Speed, Judge Clifford, William M. Evarts, and perhaps half a dozen others, who had been selected from the whole northern profession for their legal ability and acumen ; and the result of their deliberation was the sudden abandonment [of the idea of prosecution], in view of the insurmountable difficulties in the way of getting a iinal conviction, which were revealed by their patient study of the law bearing upon the case."

Notwithstanding the " sudden abandonment " in secret, change of intention was not allowed to transpire ; and the defence were compelled to keep in readiness until 1869. During all this pendency of the case, President Johnson and his cabinet seemed to evade a trial by jury, but meanwhile to aim at getting the states' supreme court to lay down a national law of treason, so as to have a national control, by a national government, of national citizens, under the penalties of national treason ; thus establishing that " absolute supremacy," of " the government " over aUegiant states and citizens, which the Philadelphia convention of 1866 anticipatorily declared. Henry J. Eaymorid, the writer of the expression quoted above from the New York Times, was the writer of the address of the said convention.

VI PREFACE.

In a letter from Mr. O'Conor to the author in London at the close of 1865, is the following : " To procure a forensic discussion of the point so ably argued by you, and a pre-arranged judicial determination of it by the supreme court, against the South, and in favor of his national government, has long been a favorite project with Mr. Johnson. He is persistently urged to it by his most intimate adviser ; and it is distinctly avowed in the message just delivered. For a long time, those who possess means of knowing the intent of the president and his cabinet, have, almost without exception, asserted very positively, that Mr. Davis would be tried in a civO. tribunal."

In the course of time, Mr. Davis was turned over by the military to the civil authority ; and, finally, under a habeas corpus, admitted to bail, with Horace Greeley, Gerrit Smith, and others as bondsmen, early in 1867 ; and thenceforward a show of desire and readiness to try was kept up ; insomuch that Mr. O'Conor did not abate his preparedness till the fall of 1868 ; when, on a motion to c[uash the indictment, the judges differed, and the case was certified up to the states' supreme tribunal, where it was finally extinguished by President Johnson's amnesty proclamation, without any laying down (or prostrating ?) of the law by the said tribunal.

To some, the prosecution seemed aiming to get around trial by jury, and hefore the supreme court, in order to merge the case in the aforesaid " pre-arranged " decision ; but the author opines with diffidence, that Seward and Chase secretly managed to prevent that predetermined decree, which necessarily and fatally impugned statehood ; they, if we judge from their history and declarations, being nothing if not devotees of the sovereignty of the American states.

These great men knew that commonwealths (N"ew York and Ohio for example) were integrally the citizens thereof, and that the fealty of the citizens was the life of the state ; and that a national law of treason on national citizens, was absolute destruction of what they themselves called " indestructible states." Hence it is presumable that they were opposed to the above-mentioned design of the president.

The adverse sentiment was aided more or less by a large class

PREFACE. vii

of northern minds, who steadily opposed, not merely the military commission, but any trial. Conspicuous among them were Gerrit Smith, Horace Greeley, and ex-governor John A. Andrew — the latter expressing himself as follows, as is stated in the letter to the Norfolk Virginian, before mentioned : " It cannot be done. The criminal law has no application here. . . . "When a whole people commit an act, rash, impolitic, and direful though it may be, . . . it is impossible to consider the criminal law as being framed to meet the case." Like Edmund Burke, these men " knew of no way to frame an indictment of a whole people."

Meanwhile, time was healing hurts, assuaging sorrows, mollifying resentments, wearing away antipathies and prejudices ; and forgiveness and conciliation were copiously welling up from the bottom of the people's hearts, so that finally, in 1868, Mr. Davis's condemnation, once an easy task, became no longer possible ; and the case, as heretofore stated, came to a happy end.

AVhat a change ! Underwood, a year or two before, had said to a committee of congress, in reply to an inquiry if a jury could be packed — " It would be difficult, but it could be done. I could pack a jury to convict. I know very earnest, ardent union men in Virginia." Such sentiments did not, however, long or widely prevail ; and in December 1868, the New York Tribune doubted if it was ever possible to convict Davis, " unless the jury had been packed," and " every democrat excluded." Peace, with benign wings, was brooding over the land.

Providence, time, the better feelings of men, their sober second thoughts, and a myriad of moral forces, ever co-work to preserve these glorious commonwealths ; and they now stand in serene and silent majesty, observed of every eye, and invoking the loyalty of every heart. Seward and Chase both, after the war, with emphasis proclaimed the states to be " free," " stubborn," " indestructible." Their life is independent ; above " government"; and they will not ''down" at the bidding of murderous usurpation, for their being is that of the people ; and the self-defence of both — the first law of nature — is identical- Perverters should cease to " wreck themselves against necessity," for, as long as freedom is a part of God's smile on this continent,

VUl PREFACE.

the state will be the political form of the people. Bryant's apostrophe to liberty applies to the commonwealth : —

"... Power at thee has launched his bolts,

And with his lightnings smitten thee : They could not quench the life thou hast from heaven."

THE MODE AND TESTIMONY OF THE WOKK.

Before concluding, it may be well to say that, wishing for criticism and correction of error, the author makes no apology for the manner of performing his task ; but takes occasion to say, that, desiring everybody to read and believe, he has aimed to use simple, direct, and untechnical language, intelligible to all classes, and to pile up evidences on every contention of the book, so as to make doubt impossible. Chapter VII. of Part I., for example, decisively proves what all the fathers considered, and the people intended, our polity to be. And for such proofs, the statements of the deputies who devised, and the people who ordained it, are used, rather than the dicta of the administering agents, who became interested alike in its success and in their own further emoluments, and who began those assumptions of ungranted powers, which have since w.ell-nigh proved fatal.

And upon this matter, it is well further to state, that as the great inquiry is one of fact, much care is taken to select the best testimony. After the federal system went into effect, party spirit, the desire of office, and the possession and use of public power and money (so perverting to the judgment and lowering to the morals), made the administrators of the government tend to become unfit for witnesses ; and it is deemed unjust to themselves, as well as to the cause of institutional liberty, to use their statements. Indeed, if tested by interest, courts would reject them. Therefore the views of Hamilton, of Madison, and even of the great and good Washington, are not used, where they expressed them as officials, interested in the successful working of the great experiment.

Henry, Martin, Lowndes, Yates, Lansing, et id omne genus, are rejected, because, as enemies, they appealed to the people's fears, and denounced the system — not only making erroneous or over-stated objections, but yielding in no degree to decisive i'RKFACE. IX

refutations, made by those who were in the convention of 1787, and knew the real intent of that body, as well as the meaning of the instrument.

Jefferson is not cited because, being abroad, he did not participate in the making of the plan ; and because, upon its being put in operation, he gradually became a heated partisan. The resolutions of '98 and '99" and Madison's report, are dispensed with, because, instead of being the source of state-rights doctrines (as their devotees seem to suppose), they are simply deductions or corollaries from the state-rights facts adduced herein, which cover the whole ground of (as well as precede and include) the constitution itself. No use is made of the masterly arguments of those great men. Tucker, Taylor of Caroline, or Calhoun, as they are partisan, and furnish no apposite facts. Nor is the president, the congress, or the federal supreme court cited, since they can testify to nothing whatever to help us us to a vere dictum, on this pure question of fact. Their dicta cannot even dent or abrade an actuality, let alone destroy it. Nor can they give decisions on disputes as to political authority between the states and the federal agency of the states, a part of which agency the said functionaries are. Their jurisdiction can only be of qnastions " under " the constitution of the states, and cannot reach those affecting the political existence and sovereignty of its makers, — such questions being most certainly above it — no matter whether the said makers are the people as a nation, or the people as states.

In short, no facts or authorities are used in the book, originating after the federal system was set in motion. The entire draught is from the head-spring — not a drop from the turbid river below ! But it is well to say here that current practice, continued usage, and fit and timely explanation (ever and precisely based on reality and truth, with construction of doubts always and inexorably in favor of original authority) must be allowed due weight in the exposition of our polity.

THE SECOND CENTUEY OF THE FEDERAL SYSTEM.

We have now a full retrospect of our departed century, as to its results on our political institutions. Its lessons are imperious.

X PREFACE.

and if we fail to learn and utilize them, we may as well give up self-government, and cry out, as did the Hebrews, " Give us a king," to save ourselves from the war and woe of his inevitable coming.

But in the opening of the new cycle — the second century of " federal liberty " ^ — we have some good auspices. Certain subjugated and degraded states have recovered that equality, vital to a voluntary union of republics ; and the head — alike of the federal agency and of the supposed centralistic party (President Hayes) — declares that " The American flag must wave over states and not over provinces " ; which can only mean, that the great American revolution, from provinces to states, is not to be annulled ; that henceforth our union will be an association of equal commonwealths, governing themselves through agencies with entrusted powers ; that the means of enforcing said authority is " the mild and salutary coercion of the magistracy " [Federalist] ; and that the soldiery is no more a part of the government, than the switch or ferule is a part of the parent or schoolmaster, but is an instrument of the civil power, to be used as a last resort.

IN CONCLUSION,

it is to be hoped that the American people will speedily come again to know and feel that they are, in form, and life, and action, an association of republics ; and to recognize their duty of preserving their sacred heritage and trust of liberty against cen-

i This phrase was used hy James 'Wilson, to express the liberty that free states enjoy under their league. " The definition of civil liberty," said he, " is, hriefly, that portion of natural liberty, which men resign to the government [i. e. to society], and which then produces more happiness than it would have produced if retained by the individuals who resign it ; — still, however, leaving to the human mind the full enjoyment of every principle that is not incompatible with the peace and order of society. Here I am easily led to the consideration of another species of liberty, which has not yet received a discriminating name, but which I will venture to term federal liberty. This, sir, consists, in the aggregate of the civil liberty which is surrendered [i. e. delegated] by each state to the national government [i. e. to the United States] ; and the same principles that operate in the establishment of a single society, with respect to the rights reserved or resigned by the individuals that compose it, will justly apply in the case of a confederation of distinct and independent states." [See Connecticut Courani, Dec. 24, 1787.]

PREFACE. Xi

tralization. The fundamental laws, which the states have severally and federally established, seem once more to be in accord with the tones of the old bell which, on the 4th of July, 1776, " proclaimed liberty throughout the land." All patriotic hearts and hopes are in harmony, and our only political discords are the usurpations, and excesses of those ephemeral creatures who fly, for a measured while, with imparted strength, in the sunshine of popular favor — creatures who, as subjects and chosen servants of the commonwealths, are sworn to keep within those written limits which they daily transcend.

CHAPTER I. — Introductory. Paoe The separateness of the states from their origin 3

Each body must, if independent, be sovereign 3

The constitution provides for a union of states 4

It is a constitution of government by states 6

It is a part of the machinery of self-government 5

The federal government is not over the states 5

The danger of giving it supreme power 6

The character and purpose of suffrage 7

Solemn warning from Edmund Burke 7

CHAPTER IL— Perversion.

All political power inherent in the people 9

The doctrine of the fathers 9

The doctrine of the perverters 12

The self-consolidation of the government . 13

CsBsarism 13

" Let us have peace " 14

Will our peace be of contentment or force f 14

CHAPTER III. — History repeats itself. Perversion has made a- spurious constitution 16

Expounders using refuted charges as expositions 16

Usurped control of suffrage 17

The American " divine right " 18

The imported theory of the social compact 18

A Roman chapter of American history 19

CHAPTER rv. — Secession and Coercion.

No constitutional coercion of states 23

The only basis of coercion 23

Secession is an act under the jus gentium 24

Coercion is justifiable under the same law 25

Our system as thus modified 25

Two important ideas 26

XIV CONTENTS.

CHAPTER v.— Rebellion or not. "Were the confederates rebels and traitors ? 28

The federal compact vindicates them . 29

Strong corroborations 30

Coercion of states is war against them 31

The nation is states — governments are creatures 31

Uncle Sam taught Davis and Lee secession 32

CHAPTER VI. — Rebellion or not. (Continued.) Patriotism is love of one's state 34

The patriotism the fathers felt and taught 34

Davis and Lee no traitors 36

Absurd views of sovereignty . 36

States alone were responsible for secession and war 37

And states alone were punishable 38

The atonement was complete 39

The jus gentium protected confederates 39

The legitimate conclusions 40

CHAPTER VII. — The Architects' Idea of the Edifice. The perversion to be exposed 41

The inquiry is one of fact 42

Testimony of the writers of "The Federalist" 42

The statements of Washington and Franklin 44

The testimony of the fiv« next in rank 45

Another decade of witnesses 46

Only a federation of sovereignties was possible 48

Professors of fact, as well as of law, wanted 49

CHAPTER VIII. — The Subject is Facts. Interpretation comes after establishment 50

So-called schools of interpretation 50

The chief expounders 52

The " school " was one of perversion 52

" School " is a misnomer except in the sense of flock 53

A passing tribute to the old Bay state 54

Averments of fact — skeleton of argument 55

1. The republic 55

2. The republic of republics 56

3. Citizenship and allegiance 56

4. Treason 56

True patriotism is fidelity to the commonwealth 57

Government is mental and functional action 57

The minds of the political bodies still live 57

CHAPTER IX. — Conclusive Evidence. Webster's statement in 1819 59

The testimony of Massachusetts 60

The object of government 60

The social compact 60

No sovereignty in government — all functionaries agents .... 61

The state can change government at will 61

The state to remain sovereign over government 61

New York testifies idem sonans 61

Lordship of the soil, or eminent domain 62

Federal sites 63

CONTENTS. XV

Summing up the testimony 63

The constitution is law in a state by her will 64

Exposure of the fallacy of a new social compact 64

Politically the people exist and act as a state 65

The stumbling-block of the expounders 66

The sacred ties according to Washington 66

The sacred ties according to Jackson and Burke 67

The union is only voluntary engagements 67

" Union and liberty, now and forever " oS

Let us preserve the commonwealths 6a

Let all declare the true principles of liberty o»

The, states are now provincialised 69

Invocation

Part II. Federalisation

CHAPTEK I. — The Actors — their Motives and Pceposes.

Statehood to remain intact 74

The chief aims of the states 76

The principal changes contemplated 76

Preliminary remarks on f ederalisation 77

CHAPTER II. — Massachusetts fedeealises herself.

The substance of the objections 79

Her statesmen denounce consolidation 80

The severalty and the sovereignty of the states 82

" We the people " means Massachusetts 82

What her statesmen said " we the people " meant 83

The fear of losing statehood 85

She proposes the tenth amendment 85

The amendment a truism though useful 86

The sole ordaining was by Massachusetts 88

CHAPTER III. — Connecticut federalises herself.

What her statesmen said . . ' 89

" We the people " means Connecticut 90

CHAPTER IV. — New York federalises herself.

What her statesmen thought of the system 92

Ratification in confidence of amendments 94

Decisive proof that " we the people " means New York 95

Her present autocratical declarations 96 xvi CONTENTS.

CHAPTER V. — New Jersey fedebalises herself.

The order and date of her ratification; and her rote 97

The views of her statesmen 97

" We the people " of New Jersey 98

CHAPTER VI. — Pennsylvania fedebalises hebself.

She associates as a sovereign 100

Views of her statesmen 100

Whom did she mean by " we the people " ? 102

CHAPTER VII. — Delaware and Maryland fedebalise

THEMSELVES.

Delaware's ratification ; order, date, and vote 104

" We the people " of Delaware 104

Maryland, her ratification ; order, date, and vote 105

" We the people " of Maryland 105

Luther Martin's letter 106

CHAPTER VIII. — Virginia federalises herself.

Virginia to remain a sovereign 107

Consolidation denounced 109

What Virginia meant by " we the people " Ill

Her ratification Ill

Making assurance doubly sure 112

The nation resuming powers delegated by Virginia 113

CHAPTER IX. — South Carolina and Georgia fedebalise

themselves.

The order and date of South Carolina's ratification; and her vote . 115

The explanation of the system to her 115

Views of the Pinckneys and Rutledges 115

"We the people "of South Carolina 119

The order and date of Georgia's ratification ; and her vote . . . 121

CHAPTER X. — New Hampshibe fedebalises hebself. New Hampshire's assertion of her statehood 122

" We the people " of New Hampshire 123

The nine and sufficient parties ratified the compact 124

The federal system established and finished 125

The convention unanimous in this view 125

The congress of states takes the same view 126

The putting of the agency at work 125

The view of congress as to the system being then completed . . . 126

CONTENTS. XVU

CHAPTER XI. — North Carolina federalises herself. Date of rejection of constitution; and vote 128

Her idea of the union expressed by Iredell and others 128

The sovereign rejects the league 131

The sovereign ratifies the league 131

Washington vs. Webster 132

CHAPTER XII. — Rhode Island federalises herself. Her rejection of the compact by vote of her people 134

Washington's view of the act 134

Finis coronal opus 134

The kepubhc op republics 136

CHAPTER XIII. — The "executed" "deed."

A fatal admission of Mr. Webster 137

Now let us see the "deed" as "executed" 137

Theratifying words of the "deed" 139

The complete federal system 140

Here then are the essentials of a federation 140

Several important reflections 141

There is no other history of establishment 141

Gross pictorial deception 142

Exposure of the fallacy 143

The more perfect union of 1788 144

The identity of character of the two unions — diagram to face p. . 144

Both systems federal unions 145

The separate wills of states made both systems 145

The later federation the more perfect 145

CHAPTER XIV. — The Testimony of the Constitution. "Whatdoesitsay of itself ?" 147

The testimony of the title and preamble 147

The " deed " names and recognizes the states 148

AH elections or powers are of states 149

The federal government always vicarious 150

All citizens and subjects are those of states 151

The union was made to preserve the states 151

The wills of states must live to amend 152

The same states made both federal compacts 162

The instrument says the states are the parties 153

The compact was done only by states 154

No sign of other theory than federation 155

Only a federation was possible 156

"They builded better than they knew" 156

XVm CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I. — Charges and Expositions identical. Testimony of Washington, Hamilton and Madison 159

Comparison of charges and expoundings 159

1. The states made into one state 160

2. The change from a federacy to a nation 160

3. The general government a sovereignty 160

4. The government the final judge of its authority 160

5. A state and a county equal in rights 161

Opposition of Henry, Martin, Lowndes, et alii 161

The federal simulacrum 162

" The Massachusetts school " as the Sheik al Gebel 162

Judge Story's relation to these perversions 162

Probable reasons for Judge Story's error 164

Were the motives worthy of the occasion t 164

CHAPTER II. — Who makes "supreme law"? Interpretation of the " Massachusetts school " 165

" What is our system t " is matter of fact 166

How the public convictions were produced 166

INTERPRETATION No. 1. — The Nation ordained .... 167

Ignoring, or concealing facts, does not destroy them 167

Did not the people, as states, ordain ? 168

The ordaining instruments 168

The compact required the states to ordain 169

The states retained their sovereignty 169

Ko " people," as such, were to ordain 170

CHAPTER III. — False Evidence of establishment. INTERPRETATION No. 2. — The Constitution national . . 171

Fallacies of the " expounders " 171

The new system " done " only by states 172

INTERPRETATION No. 3. — Story's new Article .... 172

Sheep follow bell-wethers 173

The blind leading the blind 173

INTERPRETATION No. 4. — "The States not named" . . . 174

Each state put her name in the compact 175

CONTENTS. XIX

CHAPTER IV. — Some Samples of "Sophismes." INTERPRETATION No. 5. — The Supreme Law clause . . 176

The fathers' idea of the " supreme law " 177

Views of Hamilton, Iredell, Davie, Parsons, et alii 177

Views of Madison, Hamilton, Randolph, Seward, Greeley, et alii . 178

The expounders prove too much 178

INTERPRETATION No. 6. — Partly federal and partly

national 178

Testimony of the Federalist 178

The states, in some matters, act as if a nation 179

Madison's views 179

The senate federal — the house national ..,...'.-. 179

Exposure of the gross fallacy 180

INTERPRETATION No. 7. — "Reserved to" 181

CHAPTER V. — Garblings. INTERPRETATION No. 8. — Garbling the ratifications. . . 182

Deceptive quotations 182

The true versions 183

What was the motive of these garblings I 184

INTERPRETATION No. 9. — Garbling the FederaUst . . . 185

Justice Story's effort 185

An effort of Mr. Webster's in this line 185

Testimony of the Federalist ; sophistry of the expounders . . . 186

CHAPTER VI. — Adroit Substitutions. INTERPRETATION No. 10. — Changing terms and meanings 188

Perversions of Everett and Curtis 188-9

" Irrevocable conveyances " of sovereignty 190

" Delegate," then, is the only correct word 191

Further criticism on Mr. Curtis's views 192

The people never part with self-rule 194

Apposite quotation from Noah Webster 195

CHAPTER VII. — Misstating History and Records. INTERPRETATION No. 11. — Misstating the Views and

Acts of the Convention 196

Reasons for making a new federation 196

The " mosaic dispensation " of centralism 197

The misstatement to be refuted, and the refutation 197

How the states instructed their deputies 198

The expounders' style of quoting 199

The " national " idea repudiated 200

More anti-national facts 200

The real preamble 201

The real "government "is "the United States" 202

Anti-national contemporaneous exposition 203

XX CONTENTS.

CHAPTER Vni. — Webster's Mastekpiece of Ceiticism.

INTIiRFRETATION No. 12 — "Constitutional Compact." . . 204

" Compact " and " accede " are correct 204