CH. I.]
HISTORY OF THE REVOLUTION.
197
sovereign states; but mere dependencies of Great Britain. They could make no treaty, declare no war, send no ambassadors, regulate no intercourse or commerce, nor in any other shape act, as sovereigns, in the negotiations usual between independent states. In respect to each ether, they stood in the common relation of British subjects; the legislation of neither could be controlled by any other; but there was a common subjection to the British crown.[1] If in any sense they might claim the attributes of sovereignty, it was only in that subordinate sense, to which we have alluded, as exercising within a limited extent certain usual powers of sovereignty. They did not even affect to claim a local allegiance.[2]
§ 211. In the next place, the colonies did not severally act for themselves, and proclaim their own independence. It is true, that some of the states had previously formed incipient governments for themselves; but it was done in compliance with the recommendations of congress.[3] Virginia, on the 29th of June, 1776, by a convention of delegates, declared "the government of this country, as formerly exercised under the crown of Great Britain, totally dissolved;" and proceeded to form a new constitution of government. New-Hampshire also formed a government, in December, 1775, which was manifestly intended to he temporary, "during (as they said) the unhappy and unnatural contest with Great Britain."[4] New-Jersey, too, established a frame- ↑ 1 Chalmers's Annals, 686, 687; 2 Dall. 170. Per Jay C. J.
- ↑ Journal of Congress, 1776, p. 282; 2 Haz. Coll. 591; Marsh. Colonies, App. No. 3, p. 469.
- ↑ Journal of Congress, 1775, p. 115, 231, 235, 279; 1 Pitk. Hist 351, 355; Marsh. Colon. ch. 14. p. 441, 447; 9 Hening. Stat. 112, 113; 9 Dane's Abridg. App. § 5, p. 16.
- ↑ 2 Belk. N. Hamp. ch. 25, p. 306, 308, 310; 1 Pitk. Hist. 351, 355.
