Questions

This is a list of all the questions and their associated study carrel identifiers. One can learn a lot of the "aboutness" of a text simply by reading the questions.

identifier	question
12355	If this be the case, what ought we do?
12355	How can our small country of Japan enter into fellowship with the countries beyond the sea?
12355	How can she hold up an example of a flourishing country?
12355	How can we make it our own?
12355	The question"What shall Japan do when the barbarians come next spring?"
12355	Why, then, should they longer trouble themselves to uphold feudalism, this mother of sectionalism, this colossal sham?
26095	When they are examined, they are asked, first,''Who is your father, and of what deme?
26095	who is your father''s father?
26095	who is your mother''s father, and of what deme?''
26095	who is your mother?
3032	''Ai n''t I right, General?''
3032	What happened when men went into the wilderness to live?
3032	When the sessions were over, a lady asked Franklin:"Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"
3032	Why should they, when they were only registering the will or the wishes of their superiors?
3032	]), spoken of in one of your letters?"
3032	and shall we part with it so soon?
29815	And what are the several rights but the stipulations and specifications of that contract?
29815	N''est ce pas l''énonciation des clauses et des conditions de ce contrat?"
29815	Rousseau?...
29815	What else is the declaration itself than the formulation of the state contract according to Rousseau''s ideas?
29815	Whence comes this conception in American law?
29815	[ Footnote 112: For years I have used my nose to smell with, Have I then really a provable right to it?]
52046	Else, why should he, with wealth and honour blest, Refuse his age the needful hours of rest?
52046	In the hall, one of his friends asked him how he came off?
52046	Punish a body which he could not please, Bankrupt of life, yet prodigal of ease?
52046	Sir Samuel Garrard, being a member of the House, was asked, whether the Sermon was printed at his desire or order?
52046	Sir Samuel_ Astry_, Clerk of the Crown, being ask''d what was the Course of the Court?
52046	To the King''s message he cried, like a fainting woman,"Lord, what can I do?
52046	You may perhaps cry, how comes this sudden change?
10807	Does your Grace think, then,asked Lord Sidmouth,"that this concession will tranquillize Ireland?"
10807	''Have you acted upon conviction, or have you not?''
10807	As to the dissolution, it was asked what misdemeanor the late House of Commons had committed?
10807	But why should a sovereign see anything here to be afraid of?
10807	If an insurrection of the negroes had occurred, who was responsible for the Colonial Office?
10807	If in Ireland any tithe dispute had arisen, who was responsible as Home- secretary?"
10807	If the country had been suddenly obliged to go to war, who would have been responsible for the Foreign Department?
10807	If they were,"what became of the privileges of the Commons?"
10807	The mystery how shall we explain?
10807	to Mr. Dundas,"which this young lord( Castlereagh) has brought over, which they are going to throw at my head?
28067	Are our social adjustments such as to facilitate, or at least not interfere with it?
28067	Are we sure that the political experience of England proves the wisdom of an independent judiciary?
28067	Are you sure that your Federal judiciary will act thus?
28067	But how were those imposed by the Constitution on the general government itself to be enforced?
28067	Do they make the question of success or failure, survival or elimination, depend upon individual fitness or unfitness?
28067	Does a majority vote for a party indicate that the majority approve of the entire platform of that party?
28067	Does a popular majority for a party mean that the majority approve of the policies for which that party professes to stand?
28067	Does it seek to crystallize and secure a definite expression of public opinion at the polls, or is it so constructed as to prevent it?
28067	Does the platform of the American political party serve this purpose?
28067	How, then, was this change in the attitude of the public brought about?
28067	Is free government, then, being tried here under the conditions most favorable to its success?
28067	Is progress achieved only through the preservation of the fit and the elimination of the unfit?
28067	Is that judiciary as well constructed, and as independent of the other branches, as our state judiciary?
28067	Is the evolution of a higher human type the same kind of a process as that of a higher animal or vegetable type?
28067	Is the use made of this argument from analogy warranted by the facts in the case?
28067	What, then, can be done to make that body an organ of democracy?
28067	Where are your landmarks in this government?
28067	Why did not the framers of that document clearly define the relation of the Federal to the state courts?
40904	Will you have the goodness to let me know your opinion? 40904 Did Wilson originate this or did he get it from the Pinckney draught? 40904 Do these accord with your recollection? 40904 Is there anything in the draught to refute either representation? 40904 It is in the handwriting of Pinckney; does it appear to be his original piece of work, or an engrossed copy made by him of another paper? 40904 Must we also add, with Madisonwhich could not have been anticipated"?
40904	Sparks had narrowed the issue to this,"Did the Committee follow Pinckney''s draught or did Pinckney use the Committee''s?"
40904	The question therefore which is now presented to us is this, Who contributed the substitute?
40904	What could he say?
40904	What was this disapproval?
40904	Who was the author of the first part of the 3d section?
40904	Whose was the hand that sketched it?
40904	Why was it not found in the sealed package of the Convention''s records?
17894	_ Can any thing in the World be a greater Commendation of a Work of this Nature, than to say it contains only pure Matter of Fact? 17894 And why? 17894 Are the_ Queen''s_ Subjects more burden''d to maintain the publick_ Liberty_, than the_ French_ King''s are to confirm their own_ Slavery_? 17894 Is it not apparent how great and manifest a Distinction they made between the King and the Kingdom? 17894 May not the Tables of Persecution be turn''d upon us? 17894 What need we say more? 17894 What should hinder us from an Act of_ General Naturalization_? 17894 Whether a_ French_ Civilian be debarr''d telling of Truth( when that Truth exposes Tyranny) more than a Civilian of any other Nation? 17894 Why shou''d we not make use of his Body, Estate, and Understanding, for the publick Good? 17894 Why, I pray you, may we not all be Fellow- Citizens of the World? 17894 who may''st justly challenge a Superiority in Sufferings, above all the Nations of the Earth, that have been vexed with this Plague?
31335	Would the admission of the negro as a citizen tend in the least to lessen, endanger or impair the enjoyment of our governmental institutions?
31335	Are we deprived of the rights, immunities, and privileges of American citizens?
31335	But were they mistaken?
31335	But where are the classics of our local history?
31335	Did the Declaration of Independence, for example, include negroes?
31335	Is our liberty restricted?
31335	Is the rod of oppression held over us by the General Government?
31335	Or did the system have limitations?
31335	Or will they oppose the proposition and thereby brand themselves as Tories?
31335	Satisfied with existing conditions, he asked:"Are we slaves?
31335	Shall the Constitution guarantee to all persons, irrespective of color, the right to acquire, hold, and transmit property?
31335	Shall the public schools of the State be open to persons of color?
31335	Shall the right of suffrage be extended to Negroes?
31335	Shall the testimony of Negroes be accepted in the courts?
31335	So the question before the Convention was: Shall the Judges be elected by the people or shall they be chosen by the General Assembly?
31335	Then why urge this measure, uncalled for by the people, unwarranted by the condition of the Territory?"
31335	Was it universally applicable?
31335	Was the militia to be composed exclusively of"able- bodied white male citizens?"
31335	Were they able to defeat the Constitution on the issue of its imperfections?
31335	What were the duties of Auditor, that they could not be performed for a salary of$ 500 or$ 600?
31335	Where and how is the balance to be found by the North and East for Texas?
31335	Where is it to be found but in the steadfast part of America?
31335	Who are the historians of the Commonwealths?
31335	Why?
31335	Will they support the proposition to establish a State government and thus follow in the footsteps of the Fathers of the Revolution?
31335	With the electorate the primary question was not,"Is the candidate well grounded in the principles of government and administration?"
31335	but"What are his political affiliations?"
31335	pray for the establishment of a new Territory?
14104	Can Congress Tax the Income from State and Municipal Bonds?
14104	Our Changing Constitutionand"Is the Federal Corporation Tax Constitutional?"
14104	Are the states to be submerged and virtually obliterated in the drift toward centralization?
14104	Assuming, then, that this is the real nature of the tax, is it constitutional?
14104	CAN CONGRESS TAX THE INCOME FROM STATE AND MUNICIPAL BONDS?
14104	Can Congress impose a tax on the exercise of that privilege or franchise?
14104	Does Congress possess such a power?
14104	How will the women voters meet this test?
14104	IS THE FEDERAL CORPORATION TAX CONSTITUTIONAL?
14104	IX CAN CONGRESS TAX THE INCOME FROM STATE AND MUNICIPAL BONDS?
14104	Is the Constitution hopelessly out of date?
14104	Shall the conduct of citizens of Mississippi be prescribed by vote of congressmen from New York, or supervised at the expense of New York taxpayers?
14104	Someone may ask,"What effect will the granting of votes to women have on the problem of preserving the constitutional equilibrium?"
14104	WHAT OF THE FUTURE?
14104	What is the reaction of women voters likely to be toward questions of political theory?
14104	What then of the future?
14104	What, then, is the privilege with respect to which the tax is imposed?
14104	What, then, is this common- law rule which President Taft found so clear?
14104	Whatever legal uncertainties have arisen have been chiefly owing to two questions: first, What is_ interstate_ trade within the meaning of the act?
14104	Wherein, then, did the novelty and greatness of the Constitution lie?
14104	Will an abstract proposition hold its own in their minds against a concrete appeal?
14104	Will an educational system suitable for Massachusetts necessarily fit the young of Georgia?
14104	Will the people see these things in time?
14104	X IS THE FEDERAL CORPORATION TAX CONSTITUTIONAL?
14104	XIII WHAT OF THE FUTURE?
14104	and second, Did the act enlarge the common- law rule as to what restraints were unlawful?
40679	And why should they?
40679	But how long were these constitutions, these republican forms, to exist?
40679	If requisitions are made and are not complied with, what is to be done?
40679	In what way, and in what sense, could one of them be made paramount over the other?
40679	The question arises then, What is that form?
40679	Was it to consist of one or of two houses?
40679	Was nothing due to the virtue and sense and patriotism of a majority of the people of the United States?
40679	Was the Constitution to go into operation at all, unless adopted by all the States, and if so, what number should be sufficient for its establishment?
40679	Was the commercial power to experience a like diminution from the full proportions of a just authority over the external trade of the States?
40679	What then was to be done?
40679	What then were the motives which appear to have led the convention of that State to agree to this concession of the commercial power?
40679	What was to mark this distinction as real, and give it practical effect?
40679	What was to secure them?
40679	When such an inability is supposed to have occurred, and is not made known by the President himself, how is it to be ascertained?
40679	Who was to enforce the rules which the people of a State had prescribed for their own action, when threatened by an insurgent and powerful minority?
40679	Who was to protect them against foreign invasion or domestic violence?
40679	Who was to stand as their guarantor and protector, and to vindicate the right of the majority to govern and alter and modify?
40679	Would such a scheme be practicable?
40679	Would the people of South Carolina consider the provisions made for their peculiar demands as equivalents for what had been surrendered?
40679	Would they consider the situation of their country?
40679	and if the latter, what was to be the representation and the rule of suffrage in each?
40679	whether the agreement of the nine States required by the Confederation was to be made by their legislatures, or by their delegates in Congress?
39711	Is not this good if it be true?... 39711 Some there were,"he says,"in the Tower who were put in it when very young; should they bring a habeas corpus, would the court deliver them?"
39711	All''ora il Signor Howardo li domandò per qual regina egli pregasse, se per Elisabetta?
39711	But after all, when we come fairly to consider it, is not this the case with every disaffected party in every state?
39711	But does it follow that the kingdom would be the more prosperous, if all the estates of the peerage were diverted to similar endowments?
39711	But had he no previous hint?
39711	But if the clergy could not read the language in which their very prayers were composed, what other learning or knowledge could they have?
39711	But to what purpose is all this?
39711	But who, that was really desirous of establishing the truth, would have brought Raleigh into court as an unexceptionable witness on such a question?
39711	But, if his disposition had not been rather favourable to the king, would he have been offered, or have accepted, the great seal?
39711	Could his grants, if not in themselves null, avail against his posterity, heirs like himself under the great feoffment of creation?
39711	For why were the rights and privileges of the Netherlands more fundamental than those of England?
39711	Has even the slightest regulation as to judicial procedure, or any permanent prohibition, even in fiscal law, been ever enforced without statute?
39711	He asked us,''Why we did put out of the book the articles for the homilies, consecration of bishops, and such like?''
39711	If this was the case in London, what can we think of more remote parts?
39711	Or were it even by voluntary concession, could a king alienate a divine gift, and infringe the order of Providence?
39711	The first question was,"Whether in no case whatsoever the king may not commit a subject without showing cause?"
39711	The king''s power was of God, that of the parliament only of man, obtained perhaps by rebellion; but out of rebellion what right could spring?
39711	Was it ever pretended that the king could empower his subjects to devise their freeholds, or to levy fines of their entailed lands?
39711	We can not indeed place Hooker( but whom dare we to place?)
39711	Were men''s lives better protected from unjust measures, and less at the mercy of a jealous court?
39711	What renders it absurd to call him and his children usurpers?
39711	What then had James to rest upon?
39711	When the list of them was read over in the house, a member exclaimed,"Is not bread among the number?"
39711	Wherefore then was delay to be imputed to our English parliament, if it waited for that of the sister kingdom?
39711	Whether the prince and state can continue and stand, and be maintained without this council of parliament, not altering the government of the state?
39711	Whether the speaker may overrule the house in any matter or cause in question?
39711	Whether there be any council that can make, add, or diminish from the laws of the realm, but only this council of parliament?
39711	Whether words spoken to the prince, who is after king, make any alteration in the case?
39711	Whether, in case of treason or felony, the king''s testimony was to be admitted or not?
39711	Who would not wish to believe the feeling language of his letter to the king, after the attack on him had already begun?
39711	Whom, in truth, could her privy council, on such an event, have resolved to proclaim?
42179	''Is the power of victorious rebels and usurpers from God? 42179 Being there is but one safe way to salvation, do you think that the protestant way is that way, or is it not?
42179	What,said Cromwell,"if a man should take upon him to be king?"
42179	Why should he have law himself?
42179	Why,rejoined the other,"do you think so?"
42179	478) that"none had the courage, how loyal soever their wishes were, to mention his majesty?"
42179	And why did they so, but that any trackless wilderness seemed better than his own or his friend''s tyranny?
42179	But can you tell when these Ifs will meet, or be brought together?
42179	But does he mean that the house would not have passed a vote against ship- money?
42179	But is it fair to say that the royalists were contending to set up an unlimited authority?
42179	But on what grounds did his English friends, nay some of the presbyterians themselves, advise his submission to the dictates of that party?
42179	But what can you think of Thorough when there shall be such slips in business of consequence?
42179	But why did he publish such a proclamation?
42179	By what manner of proceedings should they act?"
42179	Can you, in your conscience, give them leave to go on in that course in which, in your conscience, you think you could not be saved?"
42179	Did Oliver Cromwell receive his power from God?
42179	Do we cast on the Crown lawyers the reproach of having betrayed their country''s liberties?
42179	Do we revolt from the severities of the star- chamber?
42179	Do we think the administration of Charles during the interval of parliaments rash and violent?
42179	Does this look as if he had been reckoned one of them?
42179	Fleetwood then asked me,''If I would be willing to go myself upon this employment?''
42179	He admits, indeed, as does Harris, that the book was violent; but what can be said of the punishment?
42179	He had merely said, on a proposition to adjourn,"Why should we not adjourn for six months?"
42179	If it be not, why do you live in it?
42179	If it be, how can you find in your heart to give your subjects liberty to go another way?
42179	If this was blamable in 1679, how much more in 1681?
42179	In a dialogue, entitled"Ignoramus Vindicated,"it is asked, why were Dr. Oates and others believed against the papists?
42179	Ludlow argued against him; but what was argument to such a head?
42179	Now I pray, with so many and such Ifs as these, what may not be done, and in a brave and noble way?
42179	Then he asked the speaker if they were here, or where they were?
42179	To what sort of victory therefore did he look?
42179	What matters should they be judges of?
42179	What then was the discontent that must have ensued upon the restoration of Charles II.?
42179	What trust could be reposed in a prince capable of forfeiting so solemn a pledge?
42179	Whence, in fact, was he to look for assistance?
42179	said St. John, in arguing the bill of attainder before the peers,"who would not that others should have any?
4351	What would you recommend me to READ?
4351	Will you speak to So- and- So, and ask him to vote for my man?
4351	And what was that working?
4351	And when the taxes do not yield as they were expected to yield, who is responsible?
4351	Are they not a race contemptuous of others?
4351	Are they not a race with no special education or culture as to the modern world, and too often despising such culture?
4351	Are they not above all nations divided from the rest of the world, insular both in situation and in mind, both for good and for evil?
4351	Are they not out of the current of common European causes and affairs?
4351	As to the caprice of Parliament in the choice of a Premier, who is the best person to check it?
4351	But can such a head be found?
4351	But can we expect such a king, or, for that is the material point, can we expect a lineal series of such kings?
4351	But is the House of Lords such a chamber?
4351	But is the House of Lords that critic?
4351	But just as the merchant asks his debtor,"Could you not take a bill at four months?"
4351	But the question comes back, Will there be such a monarch just then?
4351	But what did the electors of Westminster know of Mr. Mill?
4351	But will it be so exercised?
4351	But would it not have been a miracle if the English people, directing their own policy, and being what they are, had directed a good policy?
4351	By guiding their opinion and decision, or by following it?
4351	Can it be said that the characteristic qualities of a constitutional monarch are more within its reach?
4351	Can it be said that the royal form does more?
4351	Do you know that your Conservative Government has brought in a Bill far more Radical than any former Bill, and that it is very likely to be passed?"
4351	Do you make money or do you not make it?
4351	Does it do this work?
4351	How can it be a Radical Reform Bill?
4351	I happened at the time to visit a purely agricultural and Conservative county, and I asked the local Tories,"Do you understand this Reform Bill?
4351	I propose to begin this paper by asking, not why the House of Commons governs well?
4351	I shall be asked, How often is that, and what is the test by which you know it?
4351	If we prefer real weight to unreal prestige, why may we not have it?"
4351	In the royal form of Cabinet government the sovereign then has sometimes a substantial selection; in the unroyal, who would choose?
4351	Is it to be some panel of philosophers, some fancied posterity, or some other outside authority?
4351	Is this a time for cheese- paring objection?
4351	It is noted for many things, why is it not noted for that?
4351	Now, is this objection good or bad?
4351	Or, again,"Does it not appear to you, Sir, that the reason of this formality is extinct?
4351	Speaking generally, is it wise so to change all our rulers?
4351	The grave question now is, How far will this peculiar old system continue and how far will it be altered?
4351	The issue put before these electors was, Which of two rich people will you choose?
4351	The issue was put to the French people; they were asked,"Will you be governed by Louis Napoleon, or will you be governed by an assembly?"
4351	The king could say:"Have you referred to the transactions which happened during such and such an administration, I think about fourteen years ago?
4351	The members against the expenditure rarely come down of themselves; why should they become unpopular without reason?
4351	The question is, how is that object to be attained?
4351	The question we have to answer is,"The House of Lords being such, what is the use of the Lords?"
4351	They think, if they do not say,"Why are we pinned up here?
4351	We should then say at once,"How is it possible a man from New Zealand can understand England?
4351	What are the counterweights which overpower these merits?
4351	What chance has an hereditary monarch such as nature forces him to be, such as history shows he is, against men so educated and so born?
4351	What could be more absurd than what happened in 1858?
4351	What fraction of his mind could be imagined by any percentage of their minds?
4351	What is 50,000 pounds in comparison with this great national interest?"
4351	What is meant by"well"?
4351	What is the Minister to do?
4351	What is the chance of having him just then?
4351	What were the chances against a person of Lincoln''s antecedents, elected as he was, proving to be what he was?
4351	What will be the use of the monarch whom the accidents of inheritance, such as we know them to be, must upon an average bring us just then?
4351	When you put before the mass of mankind the question,"Will you be governed by a king, or will you be governed by a constitution?"
4351	Who could expect such a people to comprehend the new and strange events of foreign places?
4351	Who is to judge?
4351	Whom, then, can you punish-- whom can you abolish-- when your taxes run short?
4351	Why are we not in the Commons where we could have so much more power?
4351	Why do we not fear that she would do this, or any approach to it?
4351	Why is this nominal rank given us, at the price of substantial influence?
4351	Why should he work?
4351	Why should not the rest of our administration be as good if we did but apply the same method to it?
4351	Why, according to popular belief is it rather characterised by the very contrary?
4351	Will it be more effectual under the royal sort of Ministerial Government, or will it be less effectual?
4351	Will that moderation be aided or impaired by the addition of a sovereign?
4351	but the fundamental-- almost unasked question-- how the House of Commons comes to be able to govern at all?
4351	how can we heartily obey one who is but a foreigner with the accident of an identical language?"
4351	how can we trust one who lives by the fluctuating favour of a distant authority?
4351	how is it possible, that a man longing to get back to the antipodes can care for England?
4351	in the Bill to regulate Cotton Factories?"
4351	so the new Minister says to the permanent under- secretary,"Could you not suggest a middle course?
4351	the inquiry comes out thus--"Will you be governed in a way you understand, or will you be governed in a way you do not understand?"
40400	Is it likely, Sir, that, if this system of government is rejected, a better will be framed and adopted? 40400 Need I call to your remembrance the_ contrasted_ scenes of which we have been witnesses?
40400	Shall I become more particular still? 40400 What is the nature and kind of that government which has been proposed for the United States by the late Convention?
40400	Wherein, then, lies the danger? 40400 ''What can be your reasons?'' 40400 ''Why will you not? 40400 ''Why?'' 40400 A natural and very important question now presents itself,--Is such the situation, are such the circumstances, of the United States? 40400 But how were these to be maintained without money? 40400 But if your fears are in danger of being realized, can not certain provisos in the ordinance guard against the evil? 40400 But in what mode were they to be made? 40400 But whatever the consequence may be, are we to lie supine? 40400 By what standard were they to be ascertained? 40400 Can we borrow money? 40400 Can we do any thing to procure us dignity, or to preserve peace and tranquillity? 40400 Can we perform a single national act? 40400 Can we provide for their welfare or happiness? 40400 Can we raise an army? 40400 Can we reasonably expect, however ardently we may wish, to behold the glorious union? 40400 Can we relieve the distress of our citizens? 40400 Could they rely on the militia? 40400 Did our citizens lose their perseverance and magnanimity? 40400 Did they become insensible of resentment and indignation at any high- handed attempt that might have been made to injure or enslave them? 40400 Does representation prevail in the legislative department of the British government? 40400 Have these ideas been realized? 40400 Have those expectations been realized? 40400 How can the common force be exerted, if the power of collecting it be put in weak, foolish, and unsteady hands? 40400 If a better could be obtained at a future time, is there any thing wrong in this? 40400 In this situation, what was to be done? 40400 Is the executive power of Great Britain founded on representation? 40400 Is there any power of the United States that can_ command_ a single shilling? 40400 Is there now a government among us that can do a single act that a national government ought to do? 40400 May not this be done without opposition, at least effectual opposition, in the present situation of our country? 40400 Rather than defer longer a free and liberal system of trade with Spain, why not agree to the exclusion of the Mississippi? 40400 Suppose we reject this system of government; what will be the consequence? 40400 The great men who composed our first council,--are they dead, have they deserted the cause, or what has become of them? 40400 What arguments alleged in support either of the evidences or the right? 40400 What has been the cause? 40400 What is the cause? 40400 What subject, in the whole range of human thought and human endeavor, could be more complex than this? 40400 What was the consequence? 40400 What were those rights? 40400 What, then, has been the cause? 40400 Where does this power reside? 40400 Where will it meet a man so experienced in military affairs, one so renowned for patriotism, conduct, and courage? 40400 Which of these systems ought to have been formed by the Convention? 40400 Who has so great a knowledge of the enemy we have to deal with? 40400 Who so much respected by the soldiery? 40400 Who so well acquainted with their situation and strength? 40400 Who, in short, so able to support the military character of Virginia? 40400 Why, then, should we prematurely urge a matter which is displeasing, and may produce disagreeable consequences, if it is our interest to let it sleep? 40400 With what propriety can we hope our flag will be respected, while we have not a single gun to fire in its defence? 40400 Would it be proper to divide the United States into two or more confederacies? 40400 Would it be reasonable in us to hope for more easy terms, who have so recently assumed our rank among the nations? 40400 Yet what evidences of that right have been produced? 40400 Yet, on the same ground, we may ask what of these elevated thoughts was new, or can be affirmed never before to have entered the conceptions of man? 40400 [ 249] The serious question recurred,--what was to be done? 40400 and How is it to be remedied? 2053 Am I my brother''s keeper? 2053 Are the States that seceded States in the Union, with no other disability than that of having no legal governments? 2053 Are they a national people, really existing outside and independently of their organization into distinct and mutually independent States? 2053 Are they the people of the States severally? 2053 But in what sense is it true? 2053 But what is to be done with the rights of minorities? 2053 But where find a nation in this the primitive sense of the word? 2053 But who are the people constituting the nation? 2053 But who are the people? 2053 But who or what determines the country? 2053 By majorities? 2053 By what right? 2053 By what right? 2053 By what right? 2053 Can a man divest himself of his nature, or lift himself above it? 2053 Can my consent, under such circumstances, even if given, be any thing but a forced consent, a consent given under duress, and therefore invalid? 2053 Did the sovereignty, which before independence was in Great Britain, pass from Great Britain to the States severally, or to the States united? 2053 Do they say reason is natural, and the law of nature is only reason? 2053 Extend the power of the government over them? 2053 Has it done it without asserting the General government as the supreme, central, or national government? 2053 Has it done it without striking a dangerous blow at the federal element of the constitution? 2053 Has not one danger been removed only to give place to another? 2053 Have they, as yet, solved that problem? 2053 How are they constituted, or what the mode and conditions of their political existence? 2053 How, from the right of the father to govern his own child, born from his loins, conclude his right to govern one not his child? 2053 How, in settling the terms of the compact, will you proceed? 2053 If mediately, what is the medium? 2053 If partly in the people and partly in the General government, is the part in the General government in Congress, or in the Executive? 2053 In suppressing by armed force the doctrine that the States are severally sovereign, what barrier is left against consolidation? 2053 In which of these senses is the word to be taken when it is said,The people are sovereign?"
2053	Is it defined and its boundaries fixed?
2053	Is it true in a supernatural sense?
2053	Is the country the whole territory of the globe?
2053	Is the power to reconstruct in the States themselves?
2053	Is the remedy in written or paper constitutions?
2053	Is the rule of unanimity to be insisted on in the convention and in the government, when it goes into operation?
2053	Is the territory indefinite or undefined?
2053	Is their reconstruction their erection into new States, or their restoration as States previously in the Union?
2053	Is this negro, more like an ape or a baboon than a human being, of the same race with myself?
2053	It might have passed to them severally, but did it?
2053	Leave them without government?
2053	Mediately or immediately?
2053	Nay, is he my brother?
2053	Shall their identity be revived and preserved, or shall they be new States, regardless of that identity?
2053	The freeman asks, why?
2053	The government?
2053	The great problem of our statesmen has been from the first, How to assert union without consolidation, and State rights without disintegration?
2053	The ruler, king, prince, or emperor, holds from God through the people, but how do the people themselves hold from God?
2053	The sovereign people?
2053	The war has silenced the State sovereignty doctrine, indeed, but has it done so without lesion to State rights?
2053	Then, again, the question comes up, who or what determines the territory?
2053	Unanimously, or only by a majority?
2053	Was Rousseau right in asserting civilization as a fall, as a deterioration of the race?
2053	Was the war which followed secession, and which cost so many lives and so much treasure, a civil war or a foreign war?
2053	Were the people of the United States who ordained and established the written constitution one people, or were they not?
2053	Were these States a part of the American nation, or were they not?
2053	What gives to the majority the right to govern the minority who dissent from its action?
2053	What is the origin and ground of sovereignty?
2053	What is to be done with them?
2053	What is to guard against this centralism?
2053	What other title to independence and sovereignty, than the fact, can you plead in behalf of any European nation?
2053	What people?
2053	What right have you to ride in your coach or astride your spirited barb while I am forced to trudge on foot?
2053	What then do the people of the several States that seceded lose by secession?
2053	What then is the fact?
2053	What, then, hinders the State once in the Union from going out or returning to its former condition of territory subject to the Union?
2053	When, then, and by what means did they or could they become severally sovereign States?
2053	Whence did Rome become a landholder, and the governing people a territorial people?
2053	Whence does any nation become a territorial nation and lord of the domain?
2053	Whence does government derive its right to govern?
2053	Whence does it get its jurisdiction of navigable rivers, lakes, bays, and the seaboard within its territorial limits, as appertaining to its domain?
2053	Whence does one- fourth of the population get its right to govern the other three- fourths?
2053	Whence its title to vacant or unoccupied lands?
2053	Whence, then, comes the sovereign right to govern?
2053	Whence, then, does government derive its territorial jurisdiction, and its right of eminent domain claimed by all national governments?
2053	Who are the collective people that have the rights of society, or, who are the sovereign people?
2053	Who are this people?
2053	Who has done it?
2053	Why ask me to free him?
2053	Will you substitute the rule of the majority, and say the majority must govern?
2053	Without government, and destitute alike of habits of obedience and habits of command, how can they initiate, establish, and sustain government?
2053	Would the government employ military force to coerce them back to their allegiance?
2053	or South Carolina, the land of Rutledge, Moultrie, Laurens, Hayne, Sumter, and Marion?
2053	or are they Territories subject to the Union?
2053	or is it in the General government?
1404	After all, may not another ground be taken on which this article of the Constitution will admit of a still more ready defense? 1404 Why,"say they,"should we adopt an imperfect thing?
1404	( 1) Are we even in a condition to remonstrate with dignity?
1404	And how could it have happened otherwise?
1404	And how far does this combination characterize the plan which has been reported by the convention?
1404	And it is asked by what authority this bold and radical innovation was undertaken?
1404	And what are the different classes of legislators but advocates and parties to the causes which they determine?
1404	And what is there in all this that can not as well be performed by the national legislature as by a State legislature?
1404	And who is there that will either take the trouble or incur the odium, of a strict scrutiny into the secret springs of the transaction?
1404	And will he not, from his own interest in that species of property, be sufficiently prone to resist every attempt to prejudice or encumber it?
1404	Are fleets and armies and revenues necessary to this purpose?
1404	Are not popular assemblies frequently subject to the impulses of rage, resentment, jealousy, avarice, and of other irregular and violent propensities?
1404	Are not the former administered by MEN as well as the latter?
1404	Are suppositions of this sort the sober admonitions of discerning patriots to a discerning people?
1404	Are the State governments to be stigmatized as tyrannies, because they possess this power?
1404	Are there engagements to the performance of which we are held by every tie respectable among men?
1404	Are there not aversions, predilections, rivalships, and desires of unjust acquisitions, that affect nations as well as kings?
1404	Are they agreed, are any two of them agreed, in their objections to the remedy proposed, or in the proper one to be substituted?
1404	Are they not the genuine and the characteristic means by which republican government provides for the liberty and happiness of the people?
1404	Are they not the identical means on which every State government in the Union relies for the attainment of these important ends?
1404	Are they only to be met with in the towns or cities?
1404	Are we afraid of foreign gold?
1404	Are we entitled by nature and compact to a free participation in the navigation of the Mississippi?
1404	Are we in a condition to resent or to repel the aggression?
1404	Are"the wealthy and the well- born,"as they are called, confined to particular spots in the several States?
1404	But SUSPICION may ask, Why then was it introduced?
1404	But a right implies a remedy; and where else could the remedy be deposited, than where it is deposited by the Constitution?
1404	But are they not all that government will admit, and that human prudence can devise?
1404	But could an appeal be made to lie from the State courts to the subordinate federal judicatories?
1404	But does it follow because there is a power to lay them that they will actually be laid?
1404	But even in that case, may he have no object beyond his present station, to which he may sacrifice his independence?
1404	But have they considered whether a better form could have been substituted?
1404	But is it a just idea?
1404	But is not the fact an alarming proof of the danger resulting from a government which does not possess regular powers commensurate to its objects?
1404	But it may be again asked, Who is to judge of the NECESSITY and PROPRIETY of the laws to be passed for executing the powers of the Union?
1404	But might not his nomination be overruled?
1404	But ought not a more direct and explicit provision to have been made in favor of the State courts?
1404	But the question again recurs, upon what pretense could he be put in possession of a force of that magnitude in time of peace?
1404	But upon what principle is the discrimination of the places of election to be made, in order to answer the purpose of the meditated preference?
1404	But was it necessary to give an INDEFINITE POWER of raising TROOPS, as well as providing fleets; and of maintaining both in PEACE, as well as in WAR?
1404	But what inference can be drawn from this, or what would they amount to, if they were not to be supreme?
1404	But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?
1404	But what is to be the object of this capricious partiality in the national councils?
1404	But what would be the contest in the case we are supposing?
1404	But where are the means to be found by the President, or the Senate, or both?
1404	But whether made by one side or the other, would each side enjoy equal advantages on the trial?
1404	But why is the experiment of an extended republic to be rejected, merely because it may comprise what is new?
1404	But why, it is asked, might not the same purpose have been accomplished by the instrumentality of the State courts?
1404	But will not this also be possessed in sufficient degree by a very few intelligent men, diffusively elected within the State?
1404	But would not her navigation be materially injured by the loss of the important advantage of being her own carrier in that trade?
1404	By way of answer to this, it has been triumphantly asked, Why not in the first instance omit that ambiguous power, and rely upon the latter resource?
1404	By what means is this object attainable?
1404	Can it be said that the limits of the United States exceed this distance?
1404	Can not the like knowledge be obtained in the national legislature from the representatives of each State?
1404	Could the Supreme Court have been relied upon as answering this description?
1404	Do the monitors deny the reality of her danger?
1404	Do these fundamental principles require, particularly, that no tax should be levied without the intermediate agency of the States?
1404	Do they begin by exciting the detestation of the very instruments of their intended usurpations?
1404	Do they deny the necessity of some speedy and powerful remedy?
1404	Do they require that the members of the government should derive their appointment from the legislatures, not from the people of the States?
1404	Do they require that the powers of the government should act on the States, and not immediately on individuals?
1404	Do they require that, in the establishment of the Constitution, the States should be regarded as distinct and independent sovereigns?
1404	Do we owe debts to foreigners and to our own citizens contracted in a time of imminent peril for the preservation of our political existence?
1404	Does the American impose on the Congress appropriations for two years?
1404	Does the British Constitution restrain the parliamentary discretion to one year?
1404	For what inducement could the Senate have to concur in a preference in which itself would not be included?
1404	For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?
1404	From what quarter can the danger proceed?
1404	Had not Congress repeatedly recommended this measure as not inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the Confederation?
1404	Had not every State but one; had not New York herself, so far complied with the plan of Congress as to recognize the PRINCIPLE of the innovation?
1404	Has commerce hitherto done anything more than change the objects of war?
1404	Has it been found that bodies of men act with more rectitude or greater disinterestedness than individuals?
1404	Has not the spirit of commerce, in many instances, administered new incentives to the appetite, both for the one and for the other?
1404	Have republics in practice been less addicted to war than monarchies?
1404	Have they, by some miraculous instinct or foresight, set apart in each of them a common place of residence?
1404	Have we not had unequivocal experience of its effects in the course of the revolution which we have just accomplished?
1404	Here another question occurs: What relation would subsist between the national and State courts in these instances of concurrent jurisdiction?
1404	How can it ever possess either energy or stability, dignity or credit, confidence at home or respectability abroad?
1404	How can it undertake or execute any liberal or enlarged plans of public good?
1404	How can its administration be any thing else than a succession of expedients temporizing, impotent, disgraceful?
1404	How can perfection spring from such materials?
1404	How can the trade between the different States be duly regulated, without some knowledge of their relative situations in these and other respects?
1404	How could recoveries be enforced?
1404	How could the Senate confer a benefit upon the President by the manner of employing their right of negative upon his nominations?
1404	How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?
1404	How far can they be combined with those other ingredients which constitute safety in the republican sense?
1404	How shall we prevent a conflict between charity and conviction?
1404	How will it be able to avoid a frequent sacrifice of its engagements to immediate necessity?
1404	How would it be possible to agree upon a rule of apportionment satisfactory to all?
1404	How, and when, and in what proportion shall aids of men and money be afforded?
1404	How, in fact, could a majority in the House of Representatives impeach themselves?
1404	I ask, What are these principles?
1404	If any question is depending in a State legislature respecting one of the counties, which demands a knowledge of local details, how is it acquired?
1404	If it should break forth into a storm, who can insure us that in its progress a part of its fury would not be spent upon us?
1404	If one was attacked, would the others fly to its succor, and spend their blood and money in its defense?
1404	If the latter, in what relation will they stand to the national tribunals?
1404	If there should be an army to be made use of as the engine of despotism, what need of the militia?
1404	If this be the design of it, who can so properly be the inquisitors for the nation as the representatives of the nation themselves?
1404	If this be their true interest, have they in fact pursued it?
1404	If, on the contrary, we ought to exceed this point, where can we stop, short of an indefinite power of providing for emergencies as they may arise?
1404	In relation to what objects?
1404	In what does our security consist against usurpation from that quarter?
1404	In what manner is this influence to be exerted?
1404	Is a bill of rights essential to liberty?
1404	Is a law proposed concerning private debts?
1404	Is a violent and unnatural decrease in the value of land a symptom of national distress?
1404	Is an indefinite power to raise money dangerous in the hands of the federal government?
1404	Is an indefinite power to raise troops dangerous?
1404	Is another object of a bill of rights to define certain immunities and modes of proceeding, which are relative to personal and private concerns?
1404	Is commerce of importance to national wealth?
1404	Is it a fair comparison?
1404	Is it here that suspicion rests her charge?
1404	Is it improper and unsafe to intermix the different powers of government in the same body of men?
1404	Is it not designed as a method of NATIONAL INQUEST into the conduct of public men?
1404	Is it not( we may ask these projectors in politics) the true interest of all nations to cultivate the same benevolent and philosophic spirit?
1404	Is it particularly dangerous to give the keys of the treasury, and the command of the army, into the same hands?
1404	Is it possible that foreign nations can either respect or confide in such a government?
1404	Is it possible that the people of America will longer consent to trust their honor, their happiness, their safety, on so precarious a foundation?
1404	Is it probable that such a combination would exist at all?
1404	Is it supported by REASON?
1404	Is it to be presumed that any other State, at the same or any other given period, will be exempt from them?
1404	Is it to be presumed, that at any future septennial epoch the same State will be free from parties?
1404	Is it true that force and right are necessarily on the same side in republican governments?
1404	Is not a want of co- operation the infallible consequence of such a system?
1404	Is not the love of wealth as domineering and enterprising a passion as that of power or glory?
1404	Is not the power of the governor, in this article, on a calculation of political consequences, greater than that of the President?
1404	Is not this the true light in which it ought to be regarded?
1404	Is private credit the friend and patron of industry?
1404	Is public credit an indispensable resource in time of public danger?
1404	Is respectability in the eyes of foreign powers a safeguard against foreign encroachments?
1404	Is the CONSEQUENCE from this doctrine admissible?
1404	Is the administration of justice between the citizens of the same State the proper department of the local governments?
1404	Is the aggregate power of the general government greater than ought to have been vested in it?
1404	Is the danger apprehended from the other branches of the federal government?
1404	Is the doctrine warranted by FACTS?
1404	Is the importation of slaves permitted by the new Constitution for twenty years?
1404	Is the power of declaring war necessary?
1404	Is the power of raising armies and equipping fleets necessary?
1404	Is this the way in which usurpers stride to dominion over a numerous and enlightened nation?
1404	Is this to be exclusive, or are those courts to possess a concurrent jurisdiction?
1404	It has been asked, what is meant by"cases arising under the Constitution,"in contradiction from those"arising under the laws of the United States"?
1404	It may be asked, Why, then, could not a time have been fixed in the Constitution?
1404	It may be asked, perhaps, what has so long kept this disjointed machine from falling entirely to pieces?
1404	Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?
1404	May he have no connections, no friends, for whom he may sacrifice it?
1404	Must it of necessity be admitted that this power is infringed, so long as a part of the old articles remain?
1404	Or are they the inflammatory ravings of incendiaries or distempered enthusiasts?
1404	Or shall we say they may be continued as long as the danger which occasioned their being raised continues?
1404	Or to what purpose would it be established, in reference to one branch of the legislature, if it could not be extended to the other?
1404	Or why is it suggested that three or four confederacies would be better than one?
1404	Or, if such a trial of firmness between the two branches were hazarded, would not the one be as likely first to yield as the other?
1404	Shall domestic manufactures be encouraged, and in what degree, by restrictions on foreign manufactures?
1404	Shall it be a week, a month, a year?
1404	Shall the Union be constituted the guardian of the common safety?
1404	Should the people of America divide themselves into three or four nations, would not the same thing happen?
1404	The remaining inquiry is: Does it also combine the requisites to safety, in a republican sense-- a due dependence on the people, a due responsibility?
1404	The same house will possess the sole right of instituting impeachments: is not this a complete counterbalance to that of determining them?
1404	The true question to be decided then is, whether the smallness of the number, as a temporary regulation, be dangerous to the public liberty?
1404	They must therefore depend on the information of intelligent men, in whom they confide; and how must these men obtain their information?
1404	This is the form in which the comparison is usually stated to the public: but is it a just form?
1404	To what purpose then require the co- operation of the Senate?
1404	To what purpose would it be to authorize suits against States for the debts they owe?
1404	Upon what principle, then, ought they to be taken into the federal estimate of representation?
1404	What answer shall we give to those who would persuade us that things so unlike resemble each other?
1404	What are the MEANS to execute a LEGISLATIVE power but LAWS?
1404	What are the advantages promised to counterbalance these disadvantages?
1404	What are the characters which practice has stamped upon it?
1404	What are the chief sources of expense in every government?
1404	What are the proper means of executing such a power, but NECESSARY and PROPER laws?
1404	What are to be the objects of federal legislation?
1404	What colorable reason could be assigned, in a country so situated, for such vast augmentations of the military force?
1404	What difference can it make in point of expense to pay officers of the customs appointed by the State or by the United States?
1404	What equitable causes can grow out of the Constitution and laws of the United States?
1404	What has occasioned that enormous accumulation of debts with which several of the European nations are oppressed?
1404	What is a LEGISLATIVE power, but a power of making LAWS?
1404	What is a power, but the ability or faculty of doing a thing?
1404	What is the ability to do a thing, but the power of employing the MEANS necessary to its execution?
1404	What is the liberty of the press?
1404	What is the power of laying and collecting taxes, but a LEGISLATIVE POWER, or a power of MAKING LAWS, to lay and collect taxes?
1404	What is the reason on which this proverbial observation is founded?
1404	What is the spirit that has in general characterized the proceedings of Congress?
1404	What more could be desired by an enlightened and reasonable people?
1404	What more desirable or more essential than this quality in the governors of nations?
1404	What more natural than that they should be disposed to exclude from the lists such dangerous competitors?
1404	What relation is to subsist between the nine or more States ratifying the Constitution, and the remaining few who do not become parties to it?
1404	What shall we think of the motives which could induce men of sense to reason in this manner?
1404	What signifies a declaration, that"the liberty of the press shall be inviolably preserved"?
1404	What then are we to understand by the objection which this paper has combated?
1404	What then( it may be asked) is the use of such a provision, if it cease to operate the moment there is an inclination to disregard it?
1404	What time shall be requisite to ascertain the violation?
1404	What will be the conclusion?
1404	What will be the consequence, if we are not able to avail ourselves of the resource in question in its full extent?
1404	What would be the probable conduct of the government in such an emergency?
1404	What, but that he might be unequal to the task which the Constitution assigns him?
1404	What, it may be asked, is the true spirit of the institution itself?
1404	What, then, are the distinctive characters of the republican form?
1404	When armies are once raised what shall be denominated"keeping them up,"contrary to the sense of the Constitution?
1404	Whence is the dreaded augmentation of expense to spring?
1404	Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent?
1404	Where in the name of common- sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow- citizens?
1404	Where is the standard of perfection to be found?
1404	Where more desirable or more essential than in the first magistrate of a nation?
1404	Whether any part of the powers transferred to the general government be unnecessary or improper?
1404	Whether the entire mass of them be dangerous to the portion of jurisdiction left in the several States?
1404	Which the end; which the means?
1404	Which was the more important, which the less important part?
1404	Who are to be the electors of the federal representatives?
1404	Who are to be the objects of popular choice?
1404	Who can determine what might have been the issue of her late convulsions, if the malcontents had been headed by a Caesar or by a Cromwell?
1404	Who can give it any definition which would not leave the utmost latitude for evasion?
1404	Who can pretend that commercial imposts are, or would be, alone equal to the present and future exigencies of the Union?
1404	Who shall command the allied armies, and from which of them shall he receive his orders?
1404	Who shall judge of the continuance of the danger?
1404	Who shall settle the terms of peace, and in case of disputes what umpire shall decide between them and compel acquiescence?
1404	Who would be the parties?
1404	Who would be willing to stake his life and his estate upon the verdict of a jury acting under the auspices of judges who had predetermined his guilt?
1404	Who would not prefer that possibility to the unceasing agitations and frequent revolutions which are the continual scourges of petty republics?
1404	Why has government been instituted at all?
1404	Why not amend it and make it perfect before it is irrevocably established?"
1404	Why should we consent to bear more than our proper share of the common burden?
1404	Why should we do more in proportion than those who are embarked with us in the same political voyage?
1404	Will it be said that the FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES of the Confederation were not within the purview of the convention, and ought not to have been varied?
1404	Will it be said that the alterations ought not to have touched the substance of the Confederation?
1404	Will it lean in favor of the landed interest, or the moneyed interest, or the mercantile interest, or the manufacturing interest?
1404	Will not the landholder know and feel whatever will promote or insure the interest of landed property?
1404	With what color of propriety could the force necessary for defense be limited by those who can not limit the force of offense?
1404	Would Connecticut and New Jersey long submit to be taxed by New York for her exclusive benefit?
1404	Would he on any occasion either have demanded or have received the like humiliation from Spain, or Britain, or any other POWERFUL nation?
1404	Would it have been an improvement of the plan, to have united the Supreme Court with the Senate, in the formation of the court of impeachments?
1404	Would not similar jealousies arise, and be in like manner cherished?
1404	Would not the mere circumstance of freight occasion a considerable deduction?
1404	Would not the principal part of its profits be intercepted by the Dutch, as a compensation for their agency and risk?
1404	Would she not have been compelled to raise and to maintain a more regular force for the execution of her design?
1404	Would the militia, in this supposition, be more ready or more able to support the federal authority than in the case of a general union?
1404	Would there not be the greatest reason to apprehend, that error, in the first sentence, would be the parent of error in the second sentence?
1404	Would they not be likely to prefer a conduct better adapted to their own immediate aggrandizement?
18	After all, may not another ground be taken on which this article of the Constitution will admit of a still more ready defense? 18 Why,"say they,"should we adopt an imperfect thing?
18	And how could it have happened otherwise?
18	And how far does this combination characterize the plan which has been reported by the convention?
18	And how far does this combination characterize the plan which has been reported by the convention?
18	And it is asked by what authority this bold and radical innovation was undertaken?
18	And what are the different classes of legislators but advocates and parties to the causes which they determine?
18	And what is there in all this that can not as well be performed by the national legislature as by a State legislature?
18	And who is there that will either take the trouble or incur the odium, of a strict scrunity into the secret springs of the transaction?
18	And who is there that will either take the trouble or incur the odium, of a strict scrunity into the secret springs of the transaction?
18	And will he not, from his own interest in that species of property, be sufficiently prone to resist every attempt to prejudice or encumber it?
18	Are fleets and armies and revenues necessary to this purpose?
18	Are not popular assemblies frequently subject to the impulses of rage, resentment, jealousy, avarice, and of other irregular and violent propensities?
18	Are not the former administered by MEN as well as the latter?
18	Are suppositions of this sort the sober admonitions of discerning patriots to a discerning people?
18	Are the State governments to be stigmatized as tyrannies, because they possess this power?
18	Are there engagements to the performance of which we are held by every tie respectable among men?
18	Are there not aversions, predilections, rivalships, and desires of unjust acquisitions, that affect nations as well as kings?
18	Are they agreed, are any two of them agreed, in their objections to the remedy proposed, or in the proper one to be substituted?
18	Are they not the genuine and the characteristic means by which republican government provides for the liberty and happiness of the people?
18	Are they not the identical means on which every State government in the Union relies for the attainment of these important ends?
18	Are they only to be met with in the towns or cities?
18	Are we afraid of foreign gold?
18	Are we entitled by nature and compact to a free participation in the navigation of the Mississippi?
18	Are we in a condition to resent or to repel the aggression?
18	Are"the wealthy and the well- born,"as they are called, confined to particular spots in the several States?
18	But SUSPICION may ask, Why then was it introduced?
18	But a right implies a remedy; and where else could the remedy be deposited, than where it is deposited by the Constitution?
18	But are they not all that government will admit, and that human prudence can devise?
18	But could an appeal be made to lie from the State courts to the subordinate federal judicatories?
18	But does it follow because there is a power to lay them that they will actually be laid?
18	But even in that case, may he have no object beyond his present station, to which he may sacrifice his independence?
18	But have they considered whether a better form could have been substituted?
18	But is it a just idea?
18	But is not the fact an alarming proof of the danger resulting from a government which does not possess regular powers commensurate to its objects?
18	But it may be again asked, Who is to judge of the NECESSITY and PROPRIETY of the laws to be passed for executing the powers of the Union?
18	But might not his nomination be overruled?
18	But ought not a more direct and explicit provision to have been made in favor of the State courts?
18	But the question again recurs, upon what pretense could he be put in possession of a force of that magnitude in time of peace?
18	But upon what principle is the discrimination of the places of election to be made, in order to answer the purpose of the meditated preference?
18	But was it necessary to give an INDEFINITE POWER of raising TROOPS, as well as providing fleets; and of maintaining both in PEACE, as well as in war?
18	But what inference can be drawn from this, or what would they amount to, if they were not to be supreme?
18	But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?
18	But what is to be the object of this capricious partiality in the national councils?
18	But what would be the contest in the case we are supposing?
18	But where are the means to be found by the President, or the Senate, or both?
18	But whether made by one side or the other, would each side enjoy equal advantages on the trial?
18	But why is the experiment of an extended republic to be rejected, merely because it may comprise what is new?
18	But why, it is asked, might not the same purpose have been accomplished by the instrumentality of the State courts?
18	But will not this also be possessed in sufficient degree by a very few intelligent men, diffusively elected within the State?
18	But would not her navigation be materially injured by the loss of the important advantage of being her own carrier in that trade?
18	By way of answer to this, it has been triumphantly asked, Why not in the first instance omit that ambiguous power, and rely upon the latter resource?
18	By what means is this object attainable?
18	Can it be said that the limits of the United States exceed this distance?
18	Can not the like knowledge be obtained in the national legislature from the representatives of each State?
18	Could the Supreme Court have been relied upon as answering this description?
18	Do the monitors deny the reality of her danger?
18	Do these fundamental principles require, particularly, that no tax should be levied without the intermediate agency of the States?
18	Do they begin by exciting the detestation of the very instruments of their intended usurpations?
18	Do they deny the necessity of some speedy and powerful remedy?
18	Do they require that the members of the government should derive their appointment from the legislatures, not from the people of the States?
18	Do they require that the powers of the government should act on the States, and not immediately on individuals?
18	Do they require that, in the establishment of the Constitution, the States should be regarded as distinct and independent sovereigns?
18	Do we owe debts to foreigners and to our own citizens contracted in a time of imminent peril for the preservation of our political existence?
18	Does the American impose on the Congress appropriations for two years?
18	Does the British Constitution restrain the parliamentary discretion to one year?
18	For what inducement could the Senate have to concur in a preference in which itself would not be included?
18	For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?
18	From what quarter can the danger proceed?
18	Had not Congress repeatedly recommended this measure as not inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the Confederation?
18	Had not every State but one; had not New York herself, so far complied with the plan of Congress as to recognize the PRINCIPLE of the innovation?
18	Has commerce hitherto done anything more than change the objects of war?
18	Has it been found that bodies of men act with more rectitude or greater disinterestedness than individuals?
18	Has not the spirit of commerce, in many instances, administered new incentives to the appetite, both for the one and for the other?
18	Have republics in practice been less addicted to war than monarchies?
18	Have they, by some miraculous instinct or foresight, set apart in each of them a common place of residence?
18	Have we not had unequivocal experience of its effects in the course of the revolution which we have just accomplished?
18	Here another question occurs: What relation would subsist between the national and State courts in these instances of concurrent jurisdiction?
18	How can it ever possess either energy or stability, dignity or credit, confidence at home or respectability abroad?
18	How can it undertake or execute any liberal or enlarged plans of public good?
18	How can its administration be any thing else than a succession of expedients temporizing, impotent, disgraceful?
18	How can perfection spring from such materials?
18	How can the trade between the different States be duly regulated, without some knowledge of their relative situations in these and other respects?
18	How could recoveries be enforced?
18	How could the Senate confer a benefit upon the President by the manner of employing their right of negative upon his nominations?
18	How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?
18	How far can they be combined with those other ingredients which constitute safety in the republican sense?
18	How far can they be combined with those other ingredients which constitute safety in the republican sense?
18	How shall we prevent a conflict between charity and judgment?
18	How will it be able to avoid a frequent sacrifice of its engagements to immediate necessity?
18	How would it be possible to agree upon a rule of apportionment satisfactory to all?
18	How, and when, and in what proportion shall aids of men and money be afforded?
18	How, in fact, could a majority in the House of Representatives impeach themselves?
18	I ask, What are these principles?
18	If any question is depending in a State legislature respecting one of the counties, which demands a knowledge of local details, how is it acquired?
18	If it should break forth into a storm, who can insure us that in its progress a part of its fury would not be spent upon us?
18	If one was attacked, would the others fly to its succor, and spend their blood and money in its defense?
18	If the latter, in what relation will they stand to the national tribunals?
18	If there should be an army to be made use of as the engine of despotism, what need of the militia?
18	If this be the design of it, who can so properly be the inquisitors for the nation as the representatives of the nation themselves?
18	If this be their true interest, have they in fact pursued it?
18	If, on the contrary, we ought to exceed this point, where can we stop, short of an indefinite power of providing for emergencies as they may arise?
18	Immediately after this clause follows another in these words:"The President shall have power to fill up??
18	Immediately after this clause follows another in these words:"The President shall have power to fill up??
18	In relation to what objects?
18	In what does our security consist against usurpation from that quarter?
18	In what manner is this influence to be exerted?
18	Is a bill of rights essential to liberty?
18	Is a law proposed concerning private debts?
18	Is a violent and unnatural decrease in the value of land a symptom of national distress?
18	Is an indefinite power to raise money dangerous in the hands of the federal government?
18	Is an indefinite power to raise troops dangerous?
18	Is another object of a bill of rights to define certain immunities and modes of proceeding, which are relative to personal and private concerns?
18	Is commerce of importance to national wealth?
18	Is it a fair comparison?
18	Is it here that suspicion rests her charge?
18	Is it improper and unsafe to intermix the different powers of government in the same body of men?
18	Is it not designed as a method of NATIONAL INQUEST into the conduct of public men?
18	Is it not( we may ask these projectors in politics) the true interest of all nations to cultivate the same benevolent and philosophic spirit?
18	Is it particularly dangerous to give the keys of the treasury, and the command of the army, into the same hands?
18	Is it possible that foreign nations can either respect or confide in such a government?
18	Is it possible that the people of America will longer consent to trust their honor, their happiness, their safety, on so precarious a foundation?
18	Is it probable that such a combination would exist at all?
18	Is it supported by REASON?
18	Is it to be presumed that any other State, at the same or any other given period, will be exempt from them?
18	Is it to be presumed, that at any future septennial epoch the same State will be free from parties?
18	Is it true that force and right are necessarily on the same side in republican governments?
18	Is not a want of co- operation the infallible consequence of such a system?
18	Is not the love of wealth as domineering and enterprising a passion as that of power or glory?
18	Is not the power of the governor, in this article, on a calculation of political consequences, greater than that of the President?
18	Is not this the true light in which it ought to be regarded?
18	Is private credit the friend and patron of industry?
18	Is public credit an indispensable resource in time of public danger?
18	Is respectability in the eyes of foreign powers a safeguard against foreign encroachments?
18	Is the CONSEQUENCE from this doctrine admissible?
18	Is the administration of justice between the citizens of the same State the proper department of the local governments?
18	Is the aggregate power of the general government greater than ought to have been vested in it?
18	Is the danger apprehended from the other branches of the federal government?
18	Is the doctrine warranted by FACTS?
18	Is the importation of slaves permitted by the new Constitution for twenty years?
18	Is the power of declaring war necessary?
18	Is the power of raising armies and equipping fleets necessary?
18	Is this the way in which usurpers stride to dominion over a numerous and enlightened nation?
18	Is this to be exclusive, or are those courts to possess a concurrent jurisdiction?
18	It has also been asked, what need of the word"equity What equitable causes can grow out of the Constitution and laws of the United States?
18	It has been asked, what is meant by"cases arising under the Constitution,"in contradiction from those"arising under the laws of the United States"?
18	It may be asked, Why, then, could not a time have been fixed in the Constitution?
18	It may be asked, perhaps, what has so long kept this disjointed machine from falling entirely to pieces?
18	Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?
18	May he have no connections, no friends, for whom he may sacrifice it?
18	Must it of necessity be admitted that this power is infringed, so long as a part of the old articles remain?
18	Or are they the inflammatory ravings of incendiaries or distempered enthusiasts?
18	Or shall we say they may be continued as long as the danger which occasioned their being raised continues?
18	Or to what purpose would it be established, in reference to one branch of the legislature, if it could not be extended to the other?
18	Or why is it suggested that three or four confederacies would be better than one?
18	Or, if such a trial of firmness between the two branches were hazarded, would not the one be as likely first to yield as the other?
18	Shall domestic manufactures be encouraged, and in what degree, by restrictions on foreign manufactures?
18	Shall it be a week, a month, a year?
18	Shall the Union be constituted the guardian of the common safety?
18	Should the people of America divide themselves into three or four nations, would not the same thing happen?
18	The remaining inquiry is: Does it also combine the requisites to safety, in a republican sense, a due dependence on the people, a due responsibility?
18	The same house will possess the sole right of instituting impeachments: is not this a complete counterbalance to that of determining them?
18	The true question to be decided then is, whether the smallness of the number, as a temporary regulation, be dangerous to the public liberty?
18	They must therefore depend on the information of intelligent men, in whom they confide; and how must these men obtain their information?
18	This is the form in which the comparison is usually stated to the public: but is it a just form?
18	To what purpose then require the co- operation of the Senate?
18	To what purpose would it be to authorize suits against States for the debts they owe?
18	Upon what principle, then, ought they to be taken into the federal estimate of representation?
18	We have neither troops, nor treasury, nor government.1 Are we even in a condition to remonstrate with dignity?
18	What answer shall we give to those who would persuade us that things so unlike resemble each other?
18	What are the MEANS to execute a LEGISLATIVE power but LAWS?
18	What are the advantages promised to counterbalance these disadvantages?
18	What are the characters which practice has stamped upon it?
18	What are the chief sources of expense in every government?
18	What are the proper means of executing such a power, but NECESSARY and PROPER laws?
18	What are to be the objects of federal legislation?
18	What colorable reason could be assigned, in a country so situated, for such vast augmentations of the military force?
18	What difference can it make in point of expense to pay officers of the customs appointed by the State or by the United States?
18	What has occasioned that enormous accumulation of debts with which several of the European nations are oppressed?
18	What is a LEGISLATIVE power, but a power of making LAWS?
18	What is a power, but the ability or faculty of doing a thing?
18	What is the ability to do a thing, but the power of employing the MEANS necessary to its execution?
18	What is the liberty of the press?
18	What is the power of laying and collecting taxes, but a LEGISLATIVE POWER, or a power of MAKING LAWS, to lay and collect taxes?
18	What is the reason on which this proverbial observation is founded?
18	What is the spirit that has in general characterized the proceedings of Congress?
18	What more could be desired by an enlightened and reasonable people?
18	What more desirable or more essential than this quality in the governors of nations?
18	What more natural than that they should be disposed to exclude from the lists such dangerous competitors?
18	What relation is to subsist between the nine or more States ratifying the Constitution, and the remaining few who do not become parties to it?
18	What shall we think of the motives which could induce men of sense to reason in this manner?
18	What signifies a declaration, that"the liberty of the press shall be inviolably preserved"?
18	What then are we to understand by the objection which this paper has combated?
18	What then( it may be asked) is the use of such a provision, if it cease to operate the moment there is an inclination to disregard it?
18	What time shall be requisite to ascertain the violation?
18	What will be the conclusion?
18	What will be the consequence, if we are not able to avail ourselves of the resource in question in its full extent?
18	What would be the probable conduct of the government in such an emergency?
18	What, but that he might be unequal to the task which the Constitution assigns him?
18	What, it may be asked, is the true spirit of the institution itself?
18	What, then, are the distinctive characters of the republican form?
18	When armies are once raised what shall be denominated"keeping them up,"contrary to the sense of the Constitution?
18	Whence is the dreaded augmentation of expense to spring?
18	Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent?
18	Where in the name of common- sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow- citizens?
18	Where is the standard of perfection to be found?
18	Where more desirable or more essential than in the first magistrate of a nation?
18	Whether any part of the powers transferred to the general government be unnecessary or improper?
18	Whether the entire mass of them be dangerous to the portion of jurisdiction left in the several States?
18	Which the end; which the means?
18	Which was the more important, which the less important part?
18	Who are to be the electors of the federal representatives?
18	Who are to be the objects of popular choice?
18	Who can determine what might have been the issue of her late convulsions, if the malcontents had been headed by a Caesar or by a Cromwell?
18	Who can give it any definition which would not leave the utmost latitude for evasion?
18	Who can pretend that commercial imposts are, or would be, alone equal to the present and future exigencies of the Union?
18	Who shall command the allied armies, and from which of them shall he receive his orders?
18	Who shall judge of the continuance of the danger?
18	Who shall settle the terms of peace, and in case of disputes what umpire shall decide between them and compel acquiescence?
18	Who would be the parties?
18	Who would be willing to stake his life and his estate upon the verdict of a jury acting under the auspices of judges who had predetermined his guilt?
18	Who would not prefer that possibility to the unceasing agitations and frequent revolutions which are the continual scourges of petty republics?
18	Why has government been instituted at all?
18	Why not amend it and make it perfect before it is irrevocably established?"
18	Why should we consent to bear more than our proper share of the common burden?
18	Why should we do more in proportion than those who are embarked with us in the same political voyage?
18	Will it be said that the FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES of the Confederation were not within the purview of the convention, and ought not to have been varied?
18	Will it be said that the alterations ought not to have touched the substance of the Confederation?
18	Will it lean in favor of the landed interest, or the moneyed interest, or the mercantile interest, or the manufacturing interest?
18	Will not the landholder know and feel whatever will promote or insure the interest of landed property?
18	With what color of propriety could the force necessary for defense be limited by those who can not limit the force of offense?
18	Would Connecticut and New Jersey long submit to be taxed by New York for her exclusive benefit?
18	Would he on any occasion either have demanded or have received the like humiliation from Spain, or Britain, or any other POWERFUL nation?
18	Would it have been an improvement of the plan, to have united the Supreme Court with the Senate, in the formation of the court of impeachments?
18	Would not similar jealousies arise, and be in like manner cherished?
18	Would not the mere circumstance of freight occasion a considerable deduction?
18	Would not the principal part of its profits be intercepted by the Dutch, as a compensation for their agency and risk?
18	Would she not have been compelled to raise and to maintain a more regular force for the execution of her design?
18	Would the militia, in this supposition, be more ready or more able to support the federal authority than in the case of a general union?
18	Would there not be the greatest reason to apprehend, that error, in the first sentence, would be the parent of error in the second sentence?
18	Would they not be likely to prefer a conduct better adapted to their own immediate aggrandizement?