{"character_count": 5807, "word_count": 956, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9718999862670898], "ccnet_perplexity": [721.7000122070312], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
tons proposal was read, June Iotn Ills party fDickinsonsl was characterized by the word .sFederal." |

 By this time eleven States had appeared and the federal or State party had increased to fiye-the consolidation or national party remaining six. The deputies from New Hampshire came in on June 23d. The great question came to issue on June 25th, when it was proposed and seconded, to erase the word national, and to substitute the words Unied States, which passed in the affrma- tive. This ended the struggle between the party of Col. Hamilton. of Messrs Rondoiph, Butler, Morris, and Pinckney,-and that ot Mir John Dickinson and his adherents, who were in favor of the preservation of State ln- dependence, State sovereignty and State rights, in every case not specifically and clearly con- ceded in the instrument then under debate, called the Constitution.

 The second party (that of Messrs. Ran dolph, Butler, and others did not advocate the abolition of State sovereignty, or State rights; but they wished to establish such system as would give their own States some preponderance. This party and the first (that of Col Hamilton) coalesced for the most part

 The third party Chat of Mr. Dlckinson) consisted of the real friends of a federal, (not national consolidated) government, to be instituted as the creation of the several States acting in their sovereign and independent characters, and concedng so much power and no more, as was necessary to promote the general welfare of this Union of States expressing, limiting, and defining the specific powers so conceded, as cautiously as the oc- casion seemed to require. We have seen that this party until about the year l79O, called the federal party) succeeded on the 25th of June. The term national, the watch word of the party in favor of consolidation was therefore relinquished, in all the subse- quent proceedings of the Convention. On the 18th of August, 1t was proposed to em- power the Legislature of the United States to grant charters ofincorporation in cases where the public good may require them, and the authority of a single State may be incompe- tent; and to establish university. These with some other similar propositions, made by the consolidation party, were referred to a committee which had been raised on the 23d of June. The two propositions were debated, and finally negatived on the l4th ol September, affording full and decisive proof. that the powers conceded to Congress, are specific, limited, enumerated powers, that do not emanate as of course from any abstract principle of what the public good may re- quire but from the deliberate concessions and absolute will of the sovereign and inde- pendent States, who then met in Convention to define and declare how many, and wha powers were required by the public good.- If Congress acts upon this vague and com prehensve principle of the general welfare 1t assumes a power not delegated, and il usurps the power of the Convention, by whose will 1t was created. The object o the Convention was to ascertain what kind and degree of authority the public good &C., tuaIly required to be delegated to Congress The members of the Convention met for tha purpose, and for that purpose only. They delberated, they settled and enacted whatev- CT they thought necessary for that purpose and they committed to Congress no part o their own peculiar power. If Congress dc exercise the authority of a Convention it is exercised by usurpation; and whether 1t be done by the ingenious subterfuge o implication and construction, by management and contrivance, in any covert and lndirec way, or openly, boldly and directly, it is 1T either case fraud on the community. Con gress was created, not as a supreme, but sub- ordinate authority, to put in force the pow CTS committed to its charge by the Constitu- tion; not to delegate at its own will and pleasure new powers to itself, unknown to- unthought of, unexpressed, and unsanctioned by the framers of that instruments body o men certainly paramount in authority to Con. gross, which owes its powers, properties ant existence to that Convention.

 The different aspects in which our federal government, as settled by the Convention O 1787, was regarded by the delegates, who were appointed to frame 1t, gave rise to two parties, which long prevailed as separate bodies in the United States, under the name of Federalists and epublicans-deslgnat not very appropriate when adopted; but which were sufficiently distinguished by the leading principles of the two parties. The Federalists were inclined to consider our gene. raj government as emanating from the people not from the States. They regarded us rather as an American nation, than as mere feder- ation of United States They were advocates for increasing and extending the powers O the general government and it's branches, le- gislative and judicial, and of depressing tht influence of the State governments. They inclined to consider the government of tht United States as one national, consolidated government, in which all power ought to b, concentrated, distinct from, and superior tc the State governments, and these last as lit tie more than municipalities.

 The anti-Federalists or Republicans a, , they called themselves, were advocates fo the full maintenance of the State Rights ], hostile to the extensive doctrine of construc. tive and implied powers-advising a strict rather than latitudinaran construction il this respect-jealous of all entrusted author t ity, lest here as every where, it should per seyeringly encroach beyond its assigned linn , its. They were fearful of converting the : federal Union into one consolidated nationa government, wherein all State rights would , be merged and lost, while the powers assum ed by COngress and the growing inNuenc,