Yet, if we average Americans pick up any volume of their recorded debates in those “conventions,” we cannot scan a few pages anywhere without finding the clearest recognition, in the minds of all, that the American concept had become the basic American law, that the Tory concept had disappeared forever from America. All of them knew that, so long as the Statute of ’76 is not repealed and the result of the Revolution not reversed, no legislatures in America can exercise any power to interfere with human freedom, except powers obtained by direct grant from the human beings over whom they are to be exercised, and that no legislatures can give to themselves or to another legislature any _such_ power. It was common in those “conventions” of long ago to illustrate some argument by reference to this admitted legal fact and the difference between the fundamental law of Great Britain and of America, in these respects. In that North Carolina convention, the same Iredell, after pointing out that the American concept of the relation of citizen to all governments had become basic American law, contrasts that fact with the fundamental law of Great Britain where “Magna Charta itself is no constitution, but a solemn instrument ascertaining certain rights of individuals, _by the legislature_ for the time being; and _every_ article of which the _legislature_ may at any time alter.” (4 _Ell. Deb._ 148.) In the Pennsylvania convention, on December I, 1787, one of the most distinguished lawyers of that generation made a memorable speech, expressing the universal knowledge that the American concept had taken forever the place of the Tory concept in fundamental American law. We commend a careful study of that speech to those of our public leaders and “constitutional” lawyers, who for five years have been acting on the assumption that the Tory concept has again become our fundamental American law. We average Americans, after living with those earlier Americans, are not surprised to listen to the statements of Wilson. “The secret is now disclosed, and it is discovered to be a dread, that the boasted _state sovereignties_ will, under this system, be disrobed of part of their power.... _Upon what principle is it contended that the sovereign power resides in the state governments?_... The proposed system sets out with a declaration that its existence depends upon the supreme authority of the people alone.... When the principle is once settled that _the people_ are the source of authority, the consequence is, that they may take from the _subordinate_ governments powers which they have hitherto trusted them, and place those powers in the general government, if it is thought that there they will be productive of more good. They can distribute one portion of power to the more contracted circle, _called state governments_; they can also furnish another proportion to the government of the United States. Who will undertake