May as well admit you’ve read nothing...
“The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals.... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.” (Albert Gallatin at the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789)
Mason has some good quotes too..
perhaps you could find some of them mason quotes, Albert Gallatin was a New York proponent of federal power.
That being said even your quote of him while technically true from some perspective doesn’t in itself support the notion of incorporation against the people and their states.
Yes the “bill of rights” can be seen as a deceleration of rights of the people “of the people at large or considered as individual”
Althou I do not agree that it establishes any right as unalienable for such rights were already unalienable, without enumeration. The matter of dispute is which rights are inalienable and which are merely prohibitions on the federal government.
I would contend that the right to self-government is by nature of its essence centrality to all other rights inalienable. But I would not contend that men cannot ceded their right to right to be without unwarranted search and measure, nor even necessarily a right to arms and free speech in all circumstances.
I am simply prepared to assert as they did, that Washington may never make any law upon theses very domestic subjects.
Washington was constructed to pay attention to the very dangerous world around us, not the world within us. Within we the people have our states to do that job.