The Sins of the Father and the 1787/1789 U.S.
CONstitution
Jeremiah 31:29-34
“When that time comes, people will no longer say, ‘The parents have eaten sour grapes, but the
children’s teeth have grown numb.’ 30 Rather, each person will die for his own sins. The teeth of
the person who eats the sour grapes will themselves grow numb. 31 “Indeed, a time is coming,”
says the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah.'
One must account for his own sins, not that of his father, likewise in law, one is not responsible
for the debts or contracts into which his father may have entered. When ones parents pass away,
all of those debts are paid from the parents estate, and any contract that was entered into by the
parents cannot be passed on to the children.
Here we take a look at the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution: was that CONstitution a contract
entered into by the men (the citizens) then living, or was it a compact between States?
The law at the time that the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution was ratified existed in the 1781
Constitution, (The Articles of Confederation), under that Constitution we here, must examine
article XIII which state quite plainly......
“Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all
questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation
shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any
alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a
Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.”
Note: that there could be NO ALTERATION without the CONFIRMATION of every States
LEGISLATURE.
Did the Legislatures of every State confirm the alterations in the 1781 Constitution, (The Articles
of Confederation), which were necessary in establishing the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution?
Let us examine James Madison's answer to this question in his letter to Mr. Edward Everett
Augst. 28 1830 ….
“It was formed, not by the Governments of the component States, as the Federal Govt. for which it
was substituted was formed; nor was it formed by a majority of the people of the U. S. as a single
community in the manner of a consolidated Government.
It was formed by the States — that is by the people in each of the States, acting in their highest
sovereign capacity; and formed, consequently by the same authority which formed the State
Constitutions”.
Mr. Madison states that the alterations in the Articles of Confederation were NOT by the
“Governments of the component States, as a Federal Govt. for which it was substituted was
formed;”
“It was formed by the people in each of the States, acting in their highest sovereign capacity.”
Let us also examine the preamble to the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution, which reads....
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure
domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the
Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
United States of America.”
So, we see that James Madison has stated that the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution was established
NOT by the State governments, (the State legislatures), but rather was established by the people,
we also see that the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution also states the same in its preamble beginning
“We the People” rather than We the States.
Remember Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation REQUIRED that ANY ALTERATION in
them must be CONFIRMED BY EACH STATES LEGISLATURE.
Clearly, there was a violation of the LAW, if each States legislatures did NOT confirm the
alterations, or abandonment of the Articles of Confederation.
It would have been necessary in maintaining the law, that Article XIII be altered and
CONFIRMED FIRST by EACH STATES LEGISLATURE, to allow the people to CONFIRM the
alteration from the Articles of Confederation to the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution. Where can
these State legislatures confirmations in the alteration of Article XIII be found? Such would
require a registered vote by the legislators in each of those States, and then a recording of that
States governments vote.
No matter how James Madison may have double talked, if it was CONFIRMED by the people, it
was a violation of the law, hence a revolutionary act, NOT a legal act. The 1787/1789 U.S.
CONstitution was NOT a COMPACT/TREATY/CHARTER, between States, but rather a
CONTRACT between the men, (People) then living, hence that CONTRACT could NOT be
passed on to the children of the parents who entered into that contract, let alone those not yet
living. One does not inherit a CONTRACTUAL obligation by simple birth, hence if the
1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution was a contract between “WE THE PEOPLE” then living then in
cannot be an obligation forced onto those yet to be born without their voluntary consent to
become party to the contract of their ancestors.
The secessions of the Southern States were as James Madison stated......
“by the people in each of the States, acting in their highest sovereign capacity; and formed,
consequently by the same authority which formed the State Constitutions”.
Each Southern State that seceded from the union, did so, by State referendum by the legislature,
and approved by the voters “ acting in their highest sovereign capacity”.
Hence just as James Madison stated in continuation to his letter to Edward Everett.....
August 28,1830
“Being thus derived from the same source as the Constitutions of the States, it has within each State,
the same authority as the Constitution of the State; and is as much a Constitution, in the strict sense
of the term, within its prescribed sphere, as the Constitutions of the States are within their respective
spheres; but with this obvious & essential difference, that being a compact among the States in their
highest sovereign capacity, and constituting the people thereof one people for certain purposes, it
cannot be altered or annulled at the will of the States individually, as the Constitution of a State may
be at its individual will.”
What James Madison, has just state here is that in FACT the 1787/1789 ratification of the
U.S.CONstitution was a NATIONAL act, and did indeed form a CONSOLIDATED government,
ending State sovereignty, NOT only that of the State governments, but that of the...
“people in each of the States,” as the “highest sovereign capacity”.
Definitions of both a Compact, and a Contract from Johnson's Dictionary of the English language
1755 edition.......
Contract....
1 . An adl whereby two parties are brought
together ; a bargain ; a compact.
CO'MPACT. «. / [faSum, Latin.] A
contract; an accord ; an agreement ; a
mutual and settled appointment between
two or more, to do or to forbear something.
James Madison, attempts to state that the ratification of the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution was an
act of the people of the States acting in their highest sovereign capacity; here again it becomes
that of a contract between the people then living, hence cannot bind people yet to be born at the
time of the ratification of that contract/compact. He also attempts to at that same time claim it to
be an act of the States via the people, however according to the proper definition of a “State”, we
again refer to Johnson's Dictionary of the English language (1755) edition....
State....
A mode of government.
A State is not a people of a defined geographic area, a State is a mode of government. There were
territories of the United States wherein people resided, yet were not yet formed into a State, as
they first had to establish a mode of government to become a State, and in order to be a member
State in the union, they had to be a mode of government in the form of a republic, as is stated
in....
Article IV section 4....
“The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union, a republican form of government”.
So, we see that The people acting in their Highest sovereign capacity is not an act of a State, as
the act of a State requires an act via a mode of government.
In conclusion, the Ratification of the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution was...
#1. In violation of the Law under the Articles of Confederation, Article XIII.
#2. It was a Contract between the people then living, and that those not living at the time of the
entry into that contract, cannot be forced to fulfill the obligations of a contract that they were not
yet alive to be party thereof.
#3. The Southern States secessions were concluded in the same manner as the ratification of the
1787/1789 U.S. Constitution to which James Madison stated was the people of those States acting
in their highest sovereign capacity.
#4. The Articles of Confederation remains as our de jure Constitution, outside of fiction.
By James Everett
Sui Juris
All rights reserved, without prejudice