That　the　sovereignty　vested　in　the　States　united；　and　was　　represented　in　some　sort　by　the　Congress；　is　evident　from　the　　fact　that　the　several　States；　when　they　wished　to　adopt　State　　constitutions　in　place　of　colonial　charters；　felt　not　225　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　at　liberty　　to　do　so　without　asking　and　obtaining　the　permission　of　Congress；　　as　the　elder　Adams　informs　us　in　his　Diary；　kept　at　the　time；　　that　is；　they　asked　and　obtained　the　equivalent　of　what　has　　since；　in　the　case　of　organizing　new　States；　been　called　an　　〃enabling　act。〃　　This　proves　that　the　States　did　not　regard　　themselves　as　sovereign　States　out　of　the　Union；　but　as　　completely　sovereign　only　in　it。　　And　this　again　proves　that　the　　Articles　of　Confederation　did　not　correspond　to　the　real；　living　　constitution　of　the　people。　　Even　then　it　was　felt　that　the　　organization　and　constitution　of　a　State　in　the　Union　could　be　　regularly　effected　only　by　the　permission　of　Congress；　and　no　　Territory　can；　it　is　well　known；　regularly　organize　itself　as　a　　State；　and　adopt　a　State　constitution；　without　an　enabling　act　by　　Congress；　or　its　equivalent。
  New　States；　indeed；　have　been　organized　and　been　admitted　into　　the　Union　without　an　enabling　act　of　Congress；　but　the　case　of　　Kansas；　if　nothing　else；　proves　that　the　proceeding　is　irregular；　　illicit；　invalid；　and　dangerous。　　Congress；　of　course；　can　　condone　the　wrong　and　validate　the　act；　but　it　were　better　that　　the　act　should　be　validly　done；　and　that　there　should　be　no　wrong　　to　condone。　　Territories　have　organized　226　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　as　States；　adopted　State　　constitutions；　and　instituted　State　governments　under　what　has　　been　called　〃squatter　sovereignty；〃　but　such　sovereignty　has　no　　existence；　because　sovereignty　is　attached　to　the　domain；　and　the　　domain　is　in　the　United　States。　　It　is　the　offspring　of　that　　false　view　of　popular　sovereignty　which　places　it　in　the　people　　personally　or　generically；　irrespective　of　the　domain；　which　　makes　sovereignty　a　purely　personal　right；　not　a　right　fixed　to　　the　soil；　and　is　simply　a　return　to　the　barbaric　constitution　of　　power。　　In　all　civilized　nations；　sovereignty　is　inseparable　from　　the　state；　and　the　state　is　inseparable　from　the　domain。　　The　　will　of　the　people；　unless　they　are　a　state；　is　no　law；　has　no　　force；　binds　nobody；　and　justifies　no　act。
  The　regular　process　of　forming　and　admitting　new　States　explains　　admirably　the　mutual　relation　of　the　Union　and　the　several　　States。　　The　people　of　a　Territory　belonging　to　the　United　States　　or　included　in　the　public　domain　not　yet　erected　into　a　State　and　　admitted　into　the　Union；　are　subjects　of　the　United　States；　　without　any　political　rights　whatever；　and；　though　a　part　of　the　　population；　are　no　part　of　the　sovereign　people　of　the　United　　States。　　They　become　a　part　of　that　people；　with　political　rights　227　and　franchises；　only　when　they　are　erected　into　a　State；　and　　admitted　into　the　Union　as　one　of　the　United　States。　　They　may　　meet　in　convention；　draw　up　and　adopt　a　constitution　declaring　or　　assuming　them　to　be　a　State；　elect　State　officers；　senators；　and　　representatives　in　the　State　legislature；　and　representatives　and　　senators　in　Congress；　but　they　are　not　yet　a　State；　and　are；　as　　before；　under　the　Territorial　government　established　by　the　　General　Government。　　It　does　not　exist　as　a　State　till　recognized　　by　Congress　and　admitted　into　the　Union。　　The　existence　of　the　　State；　and　the　rights　and　powers　of　the　people　within　the　State；　　depend　on　their　being　a　State　in　the　Union；　or　a　State　united。　　　Hence　a　State　erected　on　the　national　domain；　but　itself　outside　　of　the　Union；　is　not　an　independent　foreign　State；　but　simply　no　　State　at　all；　in　any　sense　of　the　term。　　As　there　is　no　union　　outside　of　the　States；　so　is　there　no　State　outside　of　the　Union；　　and　to　be　a　citizen　either　of　a　State　or　of　the　United　States；　it　　is　necessary　to　be　a　citizen　of　a　State；　and　of　a　State　in　the　　Union。　　The　inhabitants　of　Territories　not　yet　erected　into　　States　are　subjects；　not　citizensthat　is；　not　citizens　with　　political　rights。　　The　sovereign　people　are　not　the　people　　outside　of　State　organization；　nor　the　people　of　the　States　　sever…　228　　　　　　ally；　but　the　distinct　people　of　the　several　States　united；　　and　therefore　most　appropriately　called　the　people　of　the　United　　States。
  This　is　the　peculiarity　of　the　American　constitution　and　is　　substantially　the　very　peculiarity　noted　and　dwelt　upon　by　　Mr。　Madison　in　his　masterly　letter　to　Edward　Everett；　published　　in　the　〃North　American　Review；〃　October；　1830。
  〃I　In　order　to　understand　the　true　character　of　the　constitution　　of　the　United　States；〃　says　Mr。　Madison；　〃the　error；　not　　uncommon；　must　be　avoided　of　viewing　it　through　the　medium　either　　of　a　consolidated　government　or　of　a　confederated　government；　　whilst　it　is　neither　the　one　nor　the　other；　but　a　mixture　of　　both。　　And　having；　in　no　model；　the　similitudes　and　analogies　　applicable　to　other　systems　of　government；　it　must；　more　than　any　　other；　be　its　own　interpreter；　according　to　its　text　and　the　　facts　in　the　case。
  〃From　these　it　will　be　seen　that　the　characteristic　peculiarities　　of　the　constitution　are：　1。　The　mode　of　its　formation。　2。　The　　division　of　the　supreme　powers　of　government　between　the　States　　in　their　united　capacity　and　the　States　in　their　individual　　capacities。
  〃1。　It　was　formed　not　by　the　governments　of　the　component　States；　　as　the　Federal　Govern…　229　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　ment；　for　which　it　was　substituted；　was　　formed；　nor　was　it　formed　by　a　majority　of　the　people　of　the　　United　States　as　a　single　community；　in　the　manner　of　a　　consolidated　government。　　It　was　formed　by　the　States；　that　is；　　by　the　people　in　each　of　the　States；　acting　in　their　highest　　sovereign　capacity；　and　formed　consequently　by　the　same　authority　　which　formed　the　State　constitution。
  〃Being　thus　derived　from　the　same　source　as　the　constitutions　of　　the　States；　it　has　within　each　State　the　same　authority　as　the　　constitution　of　the　State；　and　is　as　much　a　constitution　in　the　　strict　sense　of　the　term；　within　its　prescribed　sphere；　as　the　　constitutions　of　the　States　are　within　their　respective　spheres；　　but　with　this　obvious　and　essential　difference；　that；　being　a　　compact　among　the　States　in　their　highest　capacity；　and　　constituting　the　people　thereof　one　people　for　certain　purposes；　　it　cannot　be　altered　or　annulled　at　the　will　of　the　States　　individually；　as　the　constitution　of　a　State　may　be　at　its　　individual　will。
  〃2。　And　that　it　divides　the　supreme　powers　of　government　between　　the　government　of　the　United　States　and　the　governments　of　the　　individual　States；　is　stamped　on　the　face　of　the　instrument；　the　　powers　of　war　and　of　taxation；　230　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　of　commerce　and　treaties；　and　　other　enumerated　powers　vested　in　the　government　of　the　United　　States；　are　of　high　and　sovereign　a　character　as　any　of　the　　powers　reserved　to　the　State　governments。〃
  Mr。　Jefferson；　Mr。　Webster；　Chancellor　Kent；　Judge　Story；　and　　nearly　all　the　old　Republicans；　and　even　the　old　Federalists；　on　　the　question　as　to　what　is　the　actual　constitution　of　the　United　　States；　took　substantially　the　same　view；　but　they　all；　as　well　　as　Mr。　Madison　himself；　speak　of　the　written　constitution；　which　　on　their　theory　has　and　can　have　only　a　conventional　value。　　　Mr。　Madison　evidently　recognizes　no　constitution　of　the　people　　prior　to　the　written　constitution；　from　which　the　written　　constitution；　or　the　constitution　of　the　government；　derives　all　　its　force　and　vitality。　　The　organization　of　the　American　people；　　which　he　knew　wellno　man　better；and　which　he　so　justly　　characterizes；　he　supposes　to　have　been　deliberately　formed　by　　the　people　themselves；　through　the　conventionnot　given　them　by　　Providence　as　their　original　and　inherent　constitution。　　But　this　　was　merely　the　effect　of　the　general　doctrine　which　he　had　　adopted；　in　common　with　nearly　all　his　contemporaries；　of　the　　origin　of　the　state　in　compact；　and　may　be　231　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　eliminated　from　his　　view　of　what　the　constitution　actually　is；　without　affecting　that　　view　itself。
  Mr。　Madison　lays　great　stress　on　the　fact　that　though　the　　constitution　of　the　Union　was　formed　by　the　States；　it　was　　formed；　not　by　the　governments；　but　by　the　people　of　the　several　　States；　but　this　makes　no　essential　difference；　if　the　people　are　　the　people　of　the　States；　and　sovereign　in　their　severalty；　and　　not　in　their　union。　　Had　it　been　formed　by　the　State　governments　　with　the　acquiescence　of　the　people；　it　would　have　rested　on　as　　high　authority　as　if　formed　by　the　people　of　the　State　in　　convention　assembled。　　The　only　difference　is；　that　if　the　State　　ratified　it　by　the　legislature；　she　could　abrogate　it　by　the　　legislature；　if　in　convention；　she　could　abrogate　it　only　in　　convention。　　Mr。　Madison；　following　Mr。　Jefferson；　supposes　the　　constitution　makes　the　people　of　the　several　States　one　people　　for　certain　specific　purposes；　and　leaves　it　to　be　supposed　that　　in　regard　to　all　other　matters；　or　in　all　other　relations；　they　　are　sovereign；　and　hence　he　makes　the　govern