declaring him to have forfeited his right of sovereignty.

Yet that monarch was unquestionably the born and accepted sovereign
of each one of the provinces, while the General Assembly was but a
gathering of confederates and allies, in no sense sovereign. It was an
unimaginable thing, he said, that the States of each province should
allow their whole authority and right of sovereignty to be transferred to
a board of commissioners like this before which he stood. If, for
example, a general union of France, England, and the States of the United
Netherlands should be formed (and the very words of the Act of Union
contemplated such possibility), what greater absurdity could there be
than to suppose that a college of administration created for the specific
purposes of such union would be competent to perform acts of sovereignty
within each of those countries in matters of justice, polity, and
religion?

It was known to mankind, he said, that when negotiations were entered
into for bestowing the sovereignty of the Provinces on France and on
England, special and full powers were required from, and furnished by,
the States of each individual province.

Had the sovereignty been in the assembly of the States-General, they
might have transferred it of their own motion or kept it for themselves.

Even in the ordinary course of affairs the commissioners from each
province to the General Assembly always required a special power from
their constituents before deciding any matter of great importance.

In regard to the defence of the respective provinces and cities, he had
never heard it doubted, he said, that the states or the magistrates of