The individual Americans of that generation were all born subjects of the British government. We do not understand the meaning of that statement until we accurately grasp the vital distinction between a “subject” of a government and a “citizen” of a nation. It is hardly necessary to point out, but it is amazingly important to remember, that a “subject,” as well as a “citizen,” is first of all a human being, created by an omnipotent Creator and endowed with human rights. All would be well with the world, if each human being always accurately knew the difference between right and wrong and if his accurate knowledge invariably controlled his exercise of his human freedom of will. In that case, no human government would be needed to prescribe and to enforce rules of personal conduct for the individual. As such is not the case, human government must exist. Its sole reason for existence, therefore, is that it may prescribe and enforce rules for those whom it can compel to obey its commands and that it may thus secure the utmost measure of protected enjoyment of human rights for those human beings whose government it is. Time does not permit and necessity does not require that we dwell upon the various types of government which have existed or which have been created supposedly to meet this human need. It is sufficient to grasp the simple and important fact that government ability to say what men may or may not do, in any matter which is exercise of human freedom, is the very essence of government. Where a government has no ability _of that kind, except_ what the men of its nation grant to it, where those men limit and determine the extent of that ability in their government, the men themselves are citizens. Where a government claims or exercises any ability _of that kind_, and has not received the grant of it directly from the men of the nation, where a government claims or exercises any ability _of that kind_, without any grant of it, or by grant _from_ government _to_ government, the men of that nation are subjects.