that unity to a representative body chosen by themselves.  Such a union was based on contract, and could only be constructed by communities which claimed to be independent.  Far different have been the circumstances under which England has developed itself into the British Empire.  England began as a sovereign power, having its sovereignty vested at first solely in the Sovereign, but gradually in the Sovereign and Parliament.  This sovereignty neither the Crown nor the Parliament can, jointly or severally, get rid of, for it is of the very essence of a sovereign power that it cannot, by Act of Parliament or otherwise, bind its successors.[10] This principle of supremacy has never been lost sight of by the British Parliament.  Their right to alter or suspend a colonial Constitution has never been disputed.  Contract never enters into the question.  The dominant authority delegates to its subordinate communities as much or as little power as it deems advantageous for each body, and, if it sees fit, resumes a portion or the whole of the delegated authority.  The last point of difference to be noted between the American Constitution and the Constitution of the British Empire is the fact that as Minerva sprang from the brain of Jupiter fully equipped, so the American Constitution came forth from the hands of its framers complete and, what is of more importance, practically in material matters unchangeable except by the agony of an internecine war or some overwhelming passions.  The British Empire, on the other hand, is, as respects its component members, ever in progress and flux.  An Anglo-Saxon colony, no less than a human being, has its infancy under the maternal care of a governor, its boyhood subject to the government of a representative council and an Executive appointed by the Crown, its manhood under Home Rule and responsible government, in which the Executive are bound to vacate their offices whenever they are out-voted in the Legislature.  Changes are ever taking place in the growth, so to speak, of the several British possessions, but what is the result?  Nobody ever dreams of these changes injuring the Imperial tie or the supremacy of the British Parliament, that alone towers above all, unchangeable and unimpaired; and, what is most notable, loyalty and devotion to the Crown—­that is to say, the Imperial tie—­so far from being weakened by the transition of a colony from a state of dependence in local affairs to the higher degree of a self-governing colony, are, on the contrary, strengthened almost in direct proportion as the central interference with local affairs is diminished.  On this point an unimpeachable witness—­Mr. Merivale—­says:  “What, then, are the lessons to be learnt from a consideration of the American Constitution and of our colonial system?  Surely these:  that Imperial unity and Imperial supremacy are in no degree dependent on the control exercised by the central power on its dependent members.”  Facts, however, are more conclusive than any arguments;