The difference between the governmental system of the United States and that of Great Britain, from a constitutional point of view, is not, however, merely that the principles of constitutional law are in the one case formally reduced to writing, while in the other they are recognized without being authoritatively reduced to definite statement. In Great Britain the ultimate sovereign power rests in the government and is exercised by Parliament, and no superior constitutional authority is recognized; while in the United States there is no unlimited sovereign power in either the federal or state governments or in any of the branches thereof, and ultimate sovereignty, if it is to be conceived as existing anywhere, rests with the people as a whole. The powers of government in the United States are derived by delegation in the terms of the federal and state constitutions from the people by whom such constitutions have been adopted; and no department of government can lawfully exceed the authority given to it by general or specific grant in the constitution under which it exists, nor can it transcend the limitations imposed upon it by such constitution. The real distinction, then, consists in the fact that the government of Great Britain is regarded as possessing sovereign power, while the federal and state governments of the United States possess only such powers as are generally or specifically delegated to them.

Since sovereignty in the United States does not rest in the government or any division of it, it may be interesting to inquire where it does reside. (1) The state and federal constitutions are supposed to emanate from the body of the people; but in fact the state constitutions have been adopted in most instances by popular vote, the assent of the body of the people being expressed by the qualified electors; that is, the approval of a majority of those voting, out of the one-fifth of the population which is entitled to vote, is the highest formal approval obtainable for them from the body of the people, in which ultimate sovereignty may be supposed to rest; while the federal constitution was adopted by conventions in the different states at that time composing the Union, such conventions being made up of delegates selected by the electors and acting under authority derived from them. It can hardly be said, therefore, that in any practical sense ultimate sovereignty as indicating an efficient power resides in the body of the people, for such body does not in any sense or under any circumstances act in its sovereign capacity. (2) It cannot be said that sovereignty resides in the voters, for, as they are determined and their action is regulated by the constitutions and the statutes, they can do nothing except as authorized by such constitutions. The body of the voters like the officers whom they select exercise only a delegated authority. (3) It therefore appears that although sovereignty, in the highest sense of the term, does not reside elsewhere than in the body of the people, no constitutional method is provided by which this body as distinct from the voters and the officers selected by them, can express its will. (4) Ultimate sovereignty, the term which is used as indicating ultimate power, may well be said, however, to reside in the body of the people, for by the exercise of the power of revolution any government which does not correspond to its ultimate will can be overthrown. An important object to be attained by constitutional government is to enable the people as a whole eventually to secure such action as is deemed desirable in accordance with the orderly and well-recognized methods of procedure prescribed in definite form, so that the assertion of the power of revolution, which must necessarily in itself be irregular and unregulated, shall not be necessary.

In this country ultimate sovereignty is a purely abstract term. It cannot be actually exercised in accordance with any method recognized by the constitutions or the laws of the state or federal government, but in a sense it is proper to say that federal and state governments exercise delegated sovereign power while acting in accordance with and under the limitations of the constitutions in accordance with which they are organized and exist. They cannot, however, be said to be sovereign in the full sense of the term, for the reason that sovereign power cannot in its nature be limited; while all the powers of both federal and state governments are in fact restricted by their respective constitutions.