ll never
agree to."[57]

Mr. Madison, while inclining to a strong government, said: "In the case
of a union of people under one Constitution, the nature of _the pact_
has always been understood," etc.[58]

Mr. Hamilton, in the "Federalist," repeatedly speaks of the new
government as a "_confederate republic_" and a "_confederacy_," and
calls the Constitution a "compact." (See especially Nos. IX. and LXXXV.)

General Washington--who was not only the first President under the new
Constitution, but who had presided over the Convention that drew it
up--in letters written soon after the adjournment of that body to
friends in various States, referred to the Constitution as a _compact_
or treaty, and repeatedly uses the terms "accede" and "accession," and
once the term "secession."

He asks what the opponents of the Constitution in Virginia would do, "if
nine other States should _accede_ to the Constitution."

Luther Martin, of Maryland, informs us that, in a committee of the
General Convention of 1787, protesting against the proposed violation of
the principles of the "perpetual union" already formed under the
Articles of Confederation, he made use of such language as this:

"Will you tell us we ought to trust you because you now enter
into a solemn _compact_ with us? This you have done before, and
now treat with the utmost contempt. Will you now make an appeal
to the Supreme Being, and call on Him to guarantee your
observance of this _compact_? The same you have formerly done
for your observance of the Articles of Confederation, which you
are now violating in the most wanton manner."[59]

It is needless to multiply the proofs that abound in the writings of the
"fathers" to show that Mr. Webster's "new vocabulary" was the very
language they familiarly used. Let two more examples suffice, from
authority higher than that of any individual speaker or writer, however
eminent--from authority second only, if at all inferior, to that of the
text of the Constitution itself--that is, from the acts or ordinances of
ratification by the States. They certainly ought to have been
conclusive, and should not have been unknown to Mr. Webster, for they
are the language of Massachusetts, the State which he represented in the
Senate, and of New Hampshire, the State of his nativity.

The ratification of Massachusetts is expressed in the following terms:

"COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS.

"The Convent