1. DEBATE OVER CONSTITUTION

the liberty of the press should be held sacred; but the instances ad-
duced, are sufficient to prove, that this argument is without founda-
tion.-Besides, it is evident, that the reason here assigned was not the
true one, why the framers of this constitution omitted a bill of rights;
if it had been, they would not have made certain reservations, while
they totally omitted others of more importance. We find they have, in
the 9th section of the 1st article, declared, that the writ of habeas cor-
pus shall not be suspended, unless in cases of rebellion-that no bill
of attainder, or expost facto law, shall be passed-that no title of no-
bility shall be granted by the United States, &c. If every thing which is
not given is reserved, what propriety is there in these exceptions? Does
this constitution any where grant the power of suspending the habeas
corpus, to make expost facto laws, pass bills of attainder, or grant titles
of nobility? It certainly does not in express terms. The only answer that
can be given is, that these are implied in the general powers granted.
With equal truth it may be said, that all the powers, which the bills of
rights, guard against the abuse of, are contained or implied in the
general ones granted by this constitution.
So far it is from being true, that a bill of rights is less necessary in
the general constitution than in those of the states, the contrary is
evidently the fact.-This system, if it is possible for the people of Amer-
ica to accede to it, will be an original compact; and being the last, will,
in the nature of things, vacate every former agreement inconsistent
with it. For it being a plan of government received and ratified by the
whole people, all other forms, which are in existence at the time of its
adoption, must yield to it. This is expressed in positive and unequivocal
terms, in the 6th article, "That this constitution and the laws of the
United States, which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all trea-
ties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United
States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every
state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution, or laws of
any state, to the contrary notwithstanding.7
"The senators and representatives before-mentioned, and the mem-
bers of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial of-
ficers, both of the United States, and of the several states, shall be
bound, by oath or affirmation, to support this constitution."
It is therefore not only necessarily implied thereby, but positively
expressed, that the different state constitutions are repealed and en-
tirely done away, so far as they are inconsistent with this, with the laws
which shall be made in pursuance thereof, or with treaties made, or
which shall be made, under the authority of the United States; of what

158