We remember that Madison, who worded the Fifth Article, and Hamilton, who seconded it at Philadelphia, did not so believe but knew that such belief came in direct conflict with basic American law. “As the people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power, is derived, it seems strictly consonant to the republican theory, to recur to _the same original authority_ [the people themselves in “conventions”] whenever it may be necessary to enlarge, diminish, or new-model the powers of the government.” (Hamilton in _The Federalist_, No. 49.) “The fabric of American Empire ought to rest on the solid basis of the _consent of the people_. The streams of _national_ power ought to flow _immediately_ from that pure, original fountain of all legitimate authority.” (Hamilton in _The Federalist_, No. 22.) “The express authority of the people alone could give due validity to the Constitution.” (Madison in _The Federalist_, No. 43.) “It is indispensable that the new Constitution should be ratified in the most unexceptionable form, by the supreme authority of the people themselves.” (Madison, at Philadelphia, 5 _Ell. Deb._ 158.) “The genius of republican liberty seems to demand on one side, not only that all power should be derived from the people, etc.” (Madison in _The Federalist_, No. 37.) and “There is certainly great force in this reasoning, and it must be allowed to prove that a constitutional road to the decision of the people ought to be marked out and kept open, for certain great and extraordinary occasions.” (Madison or Hamilton in _The Federalist_, No. 49.) We average Americans know that, in the Fifth Article, there is “marked out and kept open, for certain great and extraordinary occasions a _constitutional_ road to the decision of the _people_” when their own exclusive ability is alone competent to do what is deemed wise to be done. We know that the direct command to American citizens, interfering with their individual freedom and contained in Section 1 of the new Amendment, was the first direct command _of that kind_ ever attempted to be put in our Constitution. We know that the grant of power to make such commands, which is the grant of the second section of that Amendment, is the first and only grant _of that kind_ ever supposedly made since 1788. Knowing these undoubted facts, we cannot understand why Webb and those of his Tory faith did not know that the request for the command of Section 1 and for the grant of Section 2 was “a great and extraordinary” event, and that only through the “_constitutional_ road for the decision of the _people_” themselves, “marked and kept open” in the Fifth Article, the assembling of the people themselves in their “conventions,” could a valid command and a valid grant be achieved.