If it were still 1833, if there never had been a Gettysburg or an Appomattox, could Calhoun himself have done better? If there never had been the Statute of 1776 or an American Revolution to make it the basic law of America, could any Tory peer in the Westminster Parliament of 1775 have been more zealous to see that the states themselves--which are mere political entities--should determine whether there was anything in the Eighteenth Amendment “subversive of _their_ liberties and _their_ welfare?” If there is, “_they_ can be trusted to condemn it.” Let _our_ “Congress discharge its preliminary task of submission and stand aside.” What if there is anything in the Amendment subversive of _our_ liberties and _our_ welfare? Why should _we_ be trusted with the opportunity to condemn it, the opportunity which we reserved exclusively to ourselves by the most important factors in the Tenth Amendment and the Fifth Article? Why should we remember that Jefferson, also from a Southern State, penned the Statute of 1776 in which the American people commanded that no government acquire power over people except from people and not from governments? Why should we remember that Pendleton, also from the South, while actually engaged with all the rest of the American people in making the First Article, referred to it and asked, “Who but the people can delegate powers? What have the state governments to do with it?” Why should we remember that Wilson, in the previous December, that of 1787, said of our Constitution, “Upon what principle is it contended that the sovereign powers reside in the state governments? The proposed system sets out with a declaration that its existence depends upon the supreme authority of the people alone? How comes it, sir, that these state governments dictate to their superiors--to the majesty of the people?” Why should we remember that Webster, answering Hayne and Calhoun, said, also speaking of our Constitution, “While the people choose to maintain it as it is--while they are satisfied with it, and refuse to change it--who has given, or who can give, to the state legislatures a right to alter it, either by interference, construction, OR OTHERWISE?... Sir, the people have not trusted _their_ safety, in regard to the general constitution, to these hands. They have required other security and taken other bonds.” (4 _Ell. Deb._ 508.)