Harold, You have said it very well: there was then, and, indeed, often today, are conflicting views. It was indeed that illustrious Virginian, John Marshall, who had much to do with enunciating the idea that there was one country, not 13 (and more) individual ones. But even he was not always consistent. And, no matter whether they voted as state delegations or as individuals, it was never the less the Continental Congress which declared independence, not the thirteen now former colonies. Indeed, the colonies were always more independent of each other than the new states ever were. Take care, Bob Judy and Bob Huddleston 10643 Sperry Street Northglenn, CO 80234-3612 303.451.6276 [log in to unmask] To Bob and All, I see where you are going with this argument and I agree with much of the trajectory, but... This question of the nature of the states has to be discussed with precise specificity as to time. The US is not a single regime but a series of at least three; one might argue four, with one commencing after Appomattox. The first regime, that which declared independence, was the regime under the Second Continental Congress. It is important to remember that independence was declared by a UNANIMOUS vote of state delegations to that Congress. If the Continental Congress indeed was sovereign, it exercised its sovereignty in a peculiar manner. It proposed to consider independence, but adopted rules that would have allowed Rhode Island or Georgia to veto it. The second regime was under the Articles of Confederation (1781- 1788). Under that constitution, the states were declared to be sovereign. Jean Boudin and subsequent thinkers on the meaning of sovereignty were in agreement that sovereignty could not be divided because it was a kind of supremacy. If the states were sovereign than they were independent, choosing only to ally through a national government. One might say that in the 1780s we were the united States, while under the Constitution we became the United States. Clearly, by omission and the monumental supremacy clause in Article VI on the Constitution, union under our present higher law is very different than anything that proceeded it. Interestingly, it was Virginian John Marshall, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (1801- 1836) who defended national supremacy and state subordination against all comers: New Englanders as well as Southerners. In one of the Fairfax land claims cases, can't recall the name but it was decided in 1813, Marshall laid out that Virginia had been free to seize British owned land in 1776, as it was sovereign, but since this seizure had not been "completed" before the 1790s, such action was now blocked by the Constitution itself and by Jay's Treaty, which guaranteed British property rights. Harold To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html