All Americans are Sovereign According to the Supreme Court the People of America are the Sovereigns of this land. “sovereignty of the nation is in the people of the nation, and the residuary sovereignty of each State in the people of each State” “the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty” See: Chisholm v. Georgia, Dallas” Supreme Court Reports, Vol. 2, Pages 471, 472 (1793) “It will be sufficient to observe briefly that the sovereignties in Europe, and particularly in England, exist on feudal principles. … The same feudal ideas run through all their jurisprudence, and constantly remind us of the distinction between the Prince and the subject. No such ideas obtain here;at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects … and have none to govern but themselves;the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty. … In Europe, the sovereignty is generally ascribed to the Prince; here, it rests with the people; there, the sovereign actually administers the government; here, never in a single instance; our Governors are the agents of the people, and, at most, stand in the same relation to their sovereign [the people] in which regents in Europe stand to their sovereigns. Their Princes have personal powers, dignities, and preeminences; our rulers have none but official; nor do they partake in the sovereignty otherwise, or in any other capacity, than as private citizens”. Full Text: “It will be sufficient to observe briefly that the sovereignties in Europe, and particularly in England, exist on feudal principles. That system considers the Prince as the sovereign, and the people as his subjects; it regards his person as the object of allegiance, and excludes the idea of his being on an equal footing with a subject, either in a court of justice or elsewhere. That system contemplates him as being the fountain of honor and authority, and from his grace and grant derives all franchises, immunities and privileges; it is easy to perceive that such a sovereign could not be amenable to a court of justice, or subjected to judicial controul and actual constraint. It was of necessity, therefore, that suability became incompatible with such sovereignty. Besides, the Prince having all the Executive powers, the judgment of the courts would, in fact, be only monitory, not mandatory to him, and a capacity to be advised is a distinct thing from a capacity to be sued. The same feudal ideas run through all their jurisprudence, and constantly remind us of the distinction between the Prince and the subject. No such ideas obtain here; at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects(unless the African slaves among us may be so called),and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty. From the differences existing between feudal sovereignties and governments founded on compacts, it necessarily follows that their respective prerogatives must differ. Sovereignty is the right to govern; a nation or State sovereign is the person or persons in whom that resides. In Europe, the sovereignty is generally ascribed to the Prince;here, it rests with the people; there, the sovereign actually administers the government; here, never in a single instance;our Governors are the agents of the people, and, at most, stand in the same relation to their sovereign in which regents in Europe stand to their sovereigns. Their Princes have personal powers, dignities, and preeminences; our rulers have none but official; nor do they partake in the sovereignty otherwise, or in any other capacity, than as private citizens”.
Posted on: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:14:56 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015