is in direct conflict with the doctrine that this is a government of enumerated powers. That this is such a government clearly appears from the Constitution, independently of the Amendments, for otherwise there would be an instrument granting certain specified things made operative to grant other and distinct things. This natural construction of the original body of the Constitution is made absolutely certain by the Tenth Amendment. This Amendment, which was seemingly adopted with prescience of just such contention as the present, disclosed the wide-spread fear that the National Government might, under the pressure of a supposed general welfare, attempt to exercise powers _which had not been granted_. With equal determination the framers intended that no such assumption should ever find justification in the organic act, and that if in the future further powers seemed necessary, they should be granted _by the people_ in the manner they had provided for amending that act. It reads: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” _The argument of counsel ignores the principal factor in this Article_, to wit, “THE PEOPLE.” Its principal purpose was not a distribution of power between the United States and the States, but a reservation _to the people_ of all powers _not_ granted. The preamble of the Constitution declares who framed it,--“We, the people of the United States,” not the people of one State, but the people of all the States; and Article X reserves to the people of all the States the powers not delegated to the United States. The powers affecting the internal affairs of the States not granted to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the _States respectively_, and all powers of a national character which are not delegated to the National Government by the Constitution are reserved to the _people of the United States_. (206 _U. S._ at p. 89.) We average Americans know, and Webb and those of his Tory faith cannot deny, that the power to make the command of Section 1, the power purported to be granted in Section 2, are among the powers of which the Supreme Court speaks as reserved, not to the states, but to the people of America. We also know, and again _they_ cannot deny, that only those, who have, can give, or grant. For which reason, _we_ ask that _they_ answer this question: How can the state governments exercise or grant a power which was not reserved to the states but was reserved by the citizens of America to themselves?