Page:Hawkins v. Filkins 01.pdf/16

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS.
301

TERM, 1866.]
Hawkins vs. Filkins.

any state to the contrary notwithstanding; and in the case of McCulloch vs. The State of Maryland, Chief Justice MARSHALL said: "That it was a proposition of universal consent, that the government of the United States, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action, and being supreme, allegiance to it is due, both from the states, and the whole people, to the extent of its delegated powers."

We have seen that the powers not thus delegated, were expressly reserved to the states, and to the people thereof: and as the expressly delegated powers did not embrace any of the local municipal powers of the state government, they necessarily belong, exclusively, to the states, and to the people. In respect to all of which, the states have independent, sovereign power. The Powers thus conferred by the states, as well as those retained, are said by Mr. Justice BALDWIN, who delivered the opinion of the court in the case of The State of Rhode Island vs. The State of Masachusetts, 12 Peter's C. C. Rep., 719, to be of the highest sovereign capacity. In the exercise of this sovereign capacity, it is exclusive and supreme, within the limits of the state, over its municipal government. And allegiance is due from the people of the state, to their state government, to the full extent of its power and jurisdiction, and in this respect, there is no conflict between the allegiance due to the state, and to the federal government. Thus, there exist within the United States, two sovereign, independent powers, state and federal, but not over the same objects of government, because the one is strictly national, the other local. Each supreme and independent of the other, when acting within its legitimate sphere of action; each deriving its power from one supreme source, dependent in many respects upon the other for support, and both taken together constitute one government. Thus considered as parts of one government, bound together, as we must admit them to be, by an indissoluble compact—to each having been assigned sovereign independent powers, to be performed for the common good of all—we are brought to consider the distinct proposition under consideration.