serve itself, in opposition to the will of the Creator; in which case also, the creature may become a Sovereing.
Now does any government, of any kind, within these States, enjoy the right to preserve itself against the will of its creators? There is no one to be found, as yet at least, so profligate as to affirm this, although it is apparent, that there are some, who would try to prove by argument what they dare not assert as fact; and who at some time or other, will probably offer to establish such a right, "ultimate ratione." Then, if none of our governments are created by their own will, or can be preserved by their own will, when that is in opposition to the will of those by whom they were created, there is no semblance of truth in the position, that any of them are Sovereign: because, they too, are all of them compelled to acknowledge a Superior. And the argument which would infer sovereignty in one, from the want of it in another, must be unsound, unless it can be shewn, that of two falsehoods one must be true.
"The right to make Treaties," etc., is not a more direct emanation of sovereignty, than the right to punish crimes, to prescribe the modes in which alone property may be acquired and held, to create Corporations (whether for Banking or any other purpose), and the like. If the exclusive possession of the former powers, prove Sovereignty in the general government, the exclusive possession of the latter powers, which are equally necessary and important, would prove Sovereignty in the particular governments; and we should then see the case of two Sovereigns—of "Two Kings of Brentford." But as such a conception has never been entertained, except in the imagination of a humorous dramatist desirous to divert by a ludicrous exhibition, I presume grave Statesmen would not resort to such authority, to prove the verity of their theories.—Because there cannot be two Sovereigns in one Country at the same time, however, it does not follow, that there is no Sovereign there. In denying Polytheism, no man affirms Atheism, simply because both are falsehoods. Nor in denying that all or any of the governments within these States are Sovereign, does any one affirm, that there is no Sovereignty here. Sovereignty must abide in every State, or it cannot be a State. It abides in this country as perfectly as it does in Russia, or in Turkey, not in the general
