We all know that, for five years, that identity has never been known or mentioned. The failure to know or to mention it has been emphasized by the occasional references to “conventions” which have been made. In one or two arguments, there has been passing attempt to support the “nonsense,” that the Fifth Article is a “grant,” but a “grant” limited in extent, by a suggestion that the Eighteenth Amendment could be “grafted” on the Constitution entirely outside of any mode of procedure _mentioned_ in the Constitution. The suggestion has been that it could be “grafted” on the Constitution by “conventions” of the citizens _of each state_, provided that the citizens of _every_ state gave their consent. In these suggestions, we ourselves, the citizens _of America_, the whole American people of Marshall, have figured not at all. We, who _are_ the citizens of America, must now realize the vital importance to our personal liberty of our own knowledge that we are citizens of America as well as citizens of some particular state. Wilson pointed out to the Americans in the Pennsylvania convention the dual capacity of the American, if the new Constitution were adopted. We remember his statement that “it was necessary to observe the two-fold relation in which the people would stand--first as citizens of the general government and, secondly, as citizens of their particular state. The general government was meant for them in the first capacity; the state governments in the second. Both governments were derived from the people; both meant for the people; both therefore ought to be regulated on the same principles.” And we remember the one most important American principle, that every government in America must get, directly from its own citizens, every power to interfere with their individual freedom. We cannot help contrasting the accurate statement of Wilson, “in this Constitution the citizens of America appear dispensing a portion of their power,” with what must be the modern statement, if the Eighteenth Amendment is in the Constitution, namely, “in this Constitution the _state governments_ appear dispensing to themselves and to the national government another portion of the power of the citizens of America.” And, if that modern statement is “nonsense,” what else but “nonsense” are the arguments which rely upon its truth or which do not point out its absurdity?