|   
           |     The  Best Statement Respecting American Liberty
       
          I  have been studying the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire in detail since  2006. This study has required me to investigate its origins: its predecessors  in 1776 and 1784, the Constitutions of the other States, The Declaration of  Independence and The Constitution for the United States as well. My study of  these documents has led me to the following observations:    The  State of Rhode Island has no immediate post colonial Constitution; The  Constitutions of Delaware, Georgia, New Jersey and New Hampshire in 1776 have  no declarations of rights;
 The  1784 Constitution of New Hampshire was the last of the Constitutions of the  first thirteen States, and was probably written as a distillation of the  previous Constitutions;
 Only  the 1784 Constitution of New Hampshire has all of the fundamental rights that are  enumerated in the several Constitutions;
 The  Constitution of Vermont, written two years after the Constitution of New  Hampshire, is less respectful of liberty, including the recognition and  apparent approval of slavery; and
    The Constitution of New Hampshire, as a fundamental document,  is probably the best statement respecting American Liberty. Capitalization  and Punctuation
    The  writers of the fundamental documents endeavored to include as much content in  as few words as possible. Therefore, they made extensive use of punctuation and  grammar. The capitalization was not random. In the Constitution of New  Hampshire, two types of words are capitalized: proper nouns whose understanding  or definition precede the Constitution; and proper nouns that are defined in  the Constitution. Therefore, when reading the quotations, especially those from  the Constitutions, the reader ought to pay particular attention to the  capitalization and punctuation. Evangelical  Government
    You  will find several references to God in this book. They are there because I  believe that to understand the foundational documents of our country, you must  understand the world view, the perspective, of those who wrote them. The  references to God are within quotations of our founders, or Constitutions, or  in discussing quotations. Though in full disclosure, I believe that I generally  share their world view.This  book is, in fact, a treatise of American government, or what American  government was intended to be. American government finds its genesis in the  Geneva Bible. Shortly after I wrote my commentary on the Constitution of the  State of New Hampshire, I was confronted with the original wording of Part 1,  Article 6:
 Morality  and piety, rightly grounded on evangelical principles, will give the best and  greatest security to government, and lay in the hearts of men the strongest  obligations to due subjection.”
 I  had difficulty resolving this with the Articles around it which spoke of  sovereignty,  natural  rights,  government  by  consent,  power  in government derived from the People, the  obligation of revolution against tyranny. Comparing evangelical churches to  canon law churches, I came to understand that they were speaking of "evangelical"  governments, church and civil. That is to say bottom up government. The  subjection referred to was not of the governed to government, but of those in  government to the governed, and to God; and aware of that subjection, those in  government would not make or enforce laws that would inspire the people to  rebel; and hence, government would be secure and enduring.
 A  little more than two short years later, during the summer of 2008, I was  working on my part as James Madison in a skit on States Powers for the  Constitution Day celebration of the National Heritage Center for Constitutional  Studies, and Dianne Gilbert suggested that I review the Kentucky Resolutions of  1798 for material. When I read the Resolutions, I recognized them as the real  deal and determined to submit them as a resolution for the General Court of New  Hampshire (the Legislature). It was, for all intents and purposes, a cut and  paste.  I added the federal crimes that  were a consequence of amendments to the Constitution for the United States of  America. I also removed those items that were too specific to 1798 to be  relevant today. The draft Resolution was submitted in September of 2008, before  the Democratic Convention.
 Little  more was said of the resolution during the fall. I worked to get cosponsors. I  could only get Rep. Ingbretson and Rep. Comerford in the House of Representatives,  and Sen. Denley in the House of the Senate to sign on.  House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 6 affirming  State’s rights based on Jeffersonian principles was introduced to the House on  January 8, 2009, with absolutely no fanfare.
 |  |