The case of Rhode Island or Connecticut makes our point clear, although the question is equally apt for _any_ state, _if_ the Eighteenth Amendment is in the Constitution. Neither the American citizens in Rhode Island nor the legislature of Rhode Island, which speaks only for _its_ citizens and not for any citizens of America, have ever said “Yes” to the grant to the legislature of Rhode Island of this new power to interfere with the individual human freedom of the citizens of Rhode Island. The other power to interfere with that freedom, on the same subject, which the citizens of Rhode Island gave to _their_ legislature, is a power which the citizens of Rhode Island can take back from that legislature at any time. But, _if_ the Eighteenth Amendment is in the Constitution, the legislature of Rhode Island has a power to interfere with the citizens of Rhode Island in the exercise of their human freedom, which power has been granted by governments _outside_ of Rhode Island, and which power cannot be taken away from that legislature by the citizens of Rhode Island. We average Americans again ask whether the Congress, chosen to fulfill the guarantee of the Fourth Article, understood the meaning of the Fifth Article to be that it could suggest and originate any desired breach of that guarantee? _In the second place_, we would like to ask another question of the Congress which proposed that Second Section and of all who uphold the validity and the sanity of the Eighteenth Amendment. This other question is about the two distinct powers, in relation to Prohibition, which the legislature of every state must have, _if_ the Amendment is in the Constitution? The question is simple. When such legislature passes an act like the Mullan-Gage Law in New York, _who_ determines which of the two distinct powers the state legislature exercises? Is it the power granted by the citizens of that state and revocable by them? Or is it the power granted by _governments_ outside that state, over which the citizens of that state have not the slightest control? The query is a pertinent one. It is not beyond reasonable assumption that the citizens of New York may amend their state constitution and forbid their legislature to enact any statutes interfering with the freedom of the citizens of New York, in any way, on the matter which is the subject of the Eighteenth Amendment. Such a step on the part of the citizens of New York would be absolutely valid. It is not forbidden even by the remarkable Eighteenth Amendment. Such a step would immediately deprive the legislature of the State of New York of any power from New York citizens to pass such law. Moreover, it would end that Law itself, _if_ that Law was passed in the exercise of the power, in such matters, granted by the citizens of New York. If it were determined, however, that the Mullan-Gage Law had been passed by the New York legislature in the exercise of power delegated to it