States Rights, antiFederalists and Constitution

Information about States Rights and the Constitution


Article Index


MYTH: Easter is derived from false pagan goddess

What Is A Christian Nation

Biblical References in Give Me Liberty Speech by Patrick Henry

HISTORICAL RECORD: Winter Months Grazing for Sheep in Bethlehem area

Fox News December 24, 2013: Too cold for shepherds in December

The Real Lincoln - Despot

Is the Constitution Really Inimical To States Rights? - Part Fourteen

MYTH: Too cold for shepherds to Tend Flocks in December - Part 2

Gun Control Coming to the Senate Floor on Monday

74th Anniversary of 'Gone with the Wind' premiere

The First Thanksgiving Day - flyer

The Death of Jefferson Davis - December 6 1889

Marietta Daily Journal - on The First Thanksgiving

Demonstration against Lindsey Graham & Southern demographic displacement

MYTH: Too Cold For Shepherds in December

December 4 was First Thanksgiving, in Virginia, not Plymouth

Next League Demonstrations Against Southern Demographic Displacement

Federal Government Propaganda Machine

What is wrong with Thumping the Bible?

Drones for our protection. For those who will believe anything!

Is the Constitution Really Inimical To States Rights? - Part Five
Al Benson, Jr.

Anti-Federalist, George Mason There were two differing plans submitted to the Constitutional Convention dealing with what sort of government the convention would give us.

One was what was called the New Jersey Plan. According to Mike Crane: "On June 15, Mr. Patterson, a delegate from New Jersey submitted the New Jersey Plan. It was a federated form of government based upon what the Convention had been chartered to do. To propose amendments that would address the weaknesses which all agreed existed in the Articles of Confederation. It delegated specific, expressed powers to the central government ONLY!"

At this point, another plan was also submitted, the Virginia Plan. Mike has observed of this plan that "It was a plan for a national or consolidated government. A motion was made to lay this plan aside and instead work toward an effective government, rather than a national government. This motion to lay aside failed by a tie vote of 4-4. The delegates then voted to affirm the draft model of a national or consolidated government (6-1-1)." Sure didn't take some of these delegates all that long to change their votes from a federal form to a national form of government. I found it ironic that the plan for a truly federated government came from someone in the Northern state of New Jersey, while the plan for a national, consolidated government came from Virginia.

Mike noted of the Virginia Plan: "The objective was for the National Constitution to be paramount to the State Constitutions, that the National Legislature would be Supreme and be able to repeal State laws and that ratification not be by the governing bodies of the States, but by conventions other than the legitimate government of the States."

As many know, in Virginia, the Christian statesman, Patrick Henry, spoke strongly against ratification. Mr. Henry stated: "When he asks my opinion of the consolidation, of one power to reign over America with a strong hand, I will tell him I am persuaded of the rectitude of my honorable friend's opinion (Mr. Mason) that one government cannot reign over so extensive a country as this is, without absolute despotism." Well, guess what folks. As usual, Patrick Henry was right on the money. Look at what we have to suffer today in this so-called "land of the free" and tell me how wrong he was, or more accurately, how right he was.

According to Mike: "In the Virginia Plan the word 'national' was used frequently. National Legislature is used 6 times. National Executive, National Judiciary, National Officers, National Revenue, National Peace and Harmony and National laws are all used once. National is one of the most frequently used words in the document. This was a plan for a national government, a consolidated government; it was not a plan for a federated form of government which shared sovereignty with the States. In this plan the States were reduced to a very subordinate role." Folks, that's something we need to chew on awhile.

We've all been informed, via most of the "history" books we've read, that the framers gave us a federated form of government. Some have, no doubt, told you that the use of the word "national" was just a convenient way of referring to the central government and it really didn't mean anything. How nice if that were only true! But we have to remember that the framers were highly educated men. More so than we today are. They understood political definitions quite well. As Mike Crane again reminds us: "The Framers were educated men and here in the words of the delegates from Virginia, mostly crafted by James Madison, is a plan for a "national" government--a consolidated government--not a Federated government." Or, as the old country boy said "I reckon it ain't what we thunk it was." Not by a long sight, sir, not by a long sight!

To be continued.

Also see the other parts of this series by Al Benson, Jr.:
Part 1
| Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 |
Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14

If you found this article interesting, you might also like:
What is StatesRights by Mike Crane


Get US Off the USS Titanic


Al Benson, Jr. is a veteran columnist and activist. He is publisher of the Copperhead Chronicle newsletter which features commentary and analyses of history, culture, education, and faith. Mr. Benson, is author of the Homeschool History Series," a collection of booklets that discuss ignored facts about the War to Prevent Southern Independence. Additionally, he and Walter D. Kennedy are co-authors of Red Republicans and Lincoln's Marxists: Marxism in the Civil War. Mr. Benson's columns can be read at: AlBensonJr.Com, Mr. Benson's Blog, and FireEater.Org


The Copperhead Chronicle
History and Current Events From a 
Christian, Pro-Southern Perspective.

When asked to describe The COPPERHEAD CHRONICLE, Editor Al Benson, Jr., explains it is his small attempt at resurrecting real history and putting it in front of people to give them something to think about.

The Copperhead Chronicle is a quarterly newsletter written with a Christian, pro-Southern perspective. Each newsletter touches not only on our earlier history, but also on current events that will one day be considered part of our history.

The Copperhead Chronicle demonstrates that had we not suffered under "Honest Abe" and his collectivist schemes for unconstitutional big government over 130 years ago, we would not have the problems we do with today's politicians.

A subscription to The Copperhead Chronicle is $10.00 per year. Subscribe by using either the PayPal link to the left or send a check or money order by mail. Please make checks payable to Al Benson, Jr., and mail to:

The Copperhead Chronicle
PO Box 55
Sterlington, Louisiana. 71280.

For more information:  

eMail this Page


Print This Page


Southern Party of Georgia
725 Ridgeview Road
Morganton Georgia 30560

Email This page

How To Stay Informed


  More Information on the Constitution, States Rights and American Liberty.

There are currently 16 citizens logged into the Southern Party of Georgia web site. Help spread the word and there will be more. Political correctness run amok will not end until we stop it.

Spread the word, recommend this page to a friend

Previous    Home     Next

To receive automatic notification when new articles are posted, click here

Email the Southern Party of Georgia

This page sponsored by:


Support Southern and Christian Companies