Skip to main content

Full text of "Letters and other writings of James Madison : fourth president of the United States"

See other formats 


NYpLBES^BCHUBRABjES 

liisiio 


LETTERS  AND  OTHER  WRITINGS 


OP 


JAMES   MADISON. 


VOL.  IV. 


LETTERS 

AND  OTHER  WRITINGS 

OP 

JAMES   MADISON 

FOURTH  PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 
IN  FOUR  VOLUMES. 

PUBLISHED  BY  ORDER  OF  CONGRESS. 

VOL.  IV. 
1829-1836. 


PHILADELPHIA: 

J.   B.   LIPPINCOTT   &   CO. 

1865. 


% 


Entered  according  to  act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1865,  by 

J.  B.  LIPPINCOTT  4  CO., 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Eastern  Di»!.-ict 
of  Pennsylvania. 


CONTENTS  OF  VOL,  IV, 


1829.— [P.  1—55.] 
To  Richard  D.  Cutts.    Montpellier,  January  4  -  -  ■  -  1 

Addison.   Swift  sends  copy  of  the  Spectator    -  -  -  1,  2 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    Montpellier,  January  5  -  -  -  -  2 

Virginia  State  Convention.    Basis  of  representation.    Slaves-  -     2,3 

To  W.  C.  Rives.    Montpellier,  January  10     -  -  -  -  3 

Power  to  regulate  trade.  "  The  danger  not  over.'"  Hamilton's  "  duc- 
tile rules  of  construction."    Pendleton.    Jefferson.    H.'s  change  of 
opinion  as  to  the  power  of  removal  by  the  President  from  office       3,  4,  5 
To  Richard  Rush.    Montpellier,  January  17  -  -  -  -  -  5 

Letters  on  tariff.    Surprise  at  a  denial  of  the  constitutional  power, 
and  at  the  rapid  growth,  and  at  the  birthplace  of  the  doctrine  that 
would  convert  the  Federal  Government  into  a  mere  league,  &c.     -     5,  6 
To  W.  C.  Rives.    Montpellier,  January  23-  -  -  -  -6 

"A  Jackson  man  of  the  school  of  '98."  Jefferson's  letter  to  Giles.  His 
letters  to  Austin  and  others,  and  Report  in  1793,  sanctioning  the 
power  to  regulate  trade  in  favor  of  manufactures.    References  to 
Waite's  State  Papers    -  -  -  -  -  -  -6,7,8 

Censure  on  the  setting  up  of  his  unguarded  language,  &c,  against  his 
direct  and  settled  opinions.     Explanation  avoiding  the  self-contra- 
diction.    Term  "  indefinitely."     The  abuse  and  the  usurpation  of 
power.     '•  The  danger  not  over."    Ritchie  and  the  tariff  question  -      8,9 
To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    Montpellier,  February  2        -  -  -  -  9 

University.    Illiberal  criticisms.  Use  of  "  trade  "  for  "  commerce  "  a 
slip  from  the  pen.     True  meaning  obvious.    Omission  of  "  common 
defence  and  general  welfare."    Yates's  account  of  the  Convention, 
and  Luther  Martin's  Report,  inaccurate,  &c.    Jefferson's  letter  to 
Giles.    "  The  danger  not  over "        -  -  -  -    9,  10,  11,  12 

To  Frederick  List.    February  3        -  -  -  -  -  -        12 

Domestic  manufactures.    Subscriptions  -  -  -  12 

To  James  Barbour.    February  6        -  -  -  -  -  13 

Wellington's  friendly  language  toward  U.  S.    W.  India  trade.    East- 
ern States.  Anti-tariff  proceedings  in  Georgia  and  S.  Carolina.  Vir- 
ginia Legislature.    Convention  for  revising  constitution     -  -  13,  14 
To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    February  13  -           -           -           -           -  li 

"  Hampden."    Agency  as  to  Colonial  relations  with  G.  B.    Speech  of 


jv  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    TV. 

PAGE. 

1829. —  Continued. 
Alexander.    Quotations  from  Virginia  Convention.    Lloyd's  De- 
bates       14,  15,  16 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    Montpcllier,  March  1  -  -----        16 

Monroe's  paper.  Johnson.  Cabell.  T.  J.  Randolph.  Jefferson's  let- 
ters to  J.  Adams.  Hamilton.  Letters  to  Cabell.  Question  of  dis- 
tinction between  literal  and  constructive  meanings.  Federalist. 
Debates  in  State  Conventions  -  -  -  -  -  16,  17 

To  Samuel  Kercheval.   Montpellier,  September  7    -  -  -  -        17 

Jefferson's  letters  to  K.   -  -  -  -  -  -  -        17 

Outline.    September  ------  18 — 20 

Peculiarity  of"  the  compound  Government  of  U.  S.  Fundamental 
errors.  Judge  Roane.  Misstatement  in  Gov.  Giles's  "  Retrospects" 
as  to  Jefferson  -  -  -  -  -  -  -18 

Real  parties  to  constitutional  compact  of  U.  S.  the  People  of  the  States 
in  their  sovereign  character    ------        19 

Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.  arbiter  in  controversies  concerning  bound- 
aries of  power  -  -------19 

Constitutional  remedies  for  usurpations  in  which  Supreme  Court  con- 
curs      -----  ---19 

No  corresponding  control  in  General  Government  to  individual  gov- 
ernments -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -19,  20 

Ultimate  resort  to  original  rights  of  the  parties.  Cases  of  States,  parts 

of  States,  and  individual  citizens        -----        20 

Awful  consequences  of  a  dissolution  of  the  Union        -  -  -        20 

Notes  on  Suffrage    -------  21 — 30 

I.  Persons  and  property  essential  objects  of  government.  The  Federal 
principle  the  best  expedient  for  securing  the  rights  of  persons  with 

and  without  property  -  -  -  -  -  -  -21 

II.  Influence  of  the  example  of  Virginia  on  the  writer's  views  pre- 
sented in  Convention  of  1787  -  -  -  -  -  -21,22 

Right  of  the  poor  to  a  defence  against  danger  of  oppression  by  the 

rich        -  -  -  -  -  -,-  -  -22 

Danger  of  holders  of  property  from  a  majority  without  property. 
Agrarian  laws,  the  cancelling  or  evading  of  debts,  &c.  Sources  of 
oppression  in  different  forms  of  Government  -  -  -22,23 

Characteristic  excellence  of  the  Federal  polity.  Advantage  of  U.  S. 
in  actual  distribution  of  property,  and  in  universal  hope  of  acquir- 
ing it.    Future  reduction  of  landholders  to  a  minority        -  -  23,  24 

Parties  in  a  free  country.    Rights  of  landholders  to  be  protected. 

Examples  of  the  defensive  principle  -----        25 

Modifications  for  securing  property :  1.  Freehold  suffrage,  &c.  2. 
Confining  right  of  suffrage  to  one  branch,  See.,  and  for  the  other 
branch  to  those  without  property.  3.  Confining  to  freeholders  the 
right  of  electing  to  one  branch,  and  admitting  all  others  to  a-  com- 
mon right  with  holders  of  property  in  electing  the  other  branch. 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  v 

PAGE. 

1829.—  Continued. 
Experiments  in  N.  York  and  N.  Carolina.     4.  Universal  suffrage : 
enlargement  of*  election  districts  for  one  branch,  and  prolongation 
of  its  period  of  service.    5.  Universal  suffrage  :  short  periods  of  ser- 
vice within  contracted  spheres.    Ordinary  influence  of  property, 
superior  information  of  its  holders,  popular  sense  of  justice,  etc., 
diffusive  education,  difficulties  of  combining,  &c.      -  -        25,  26,  27 

Right  of  the  mass  of  citizens  to  a  voice  in  making  laws  and  choosing 

magistrates        -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -27, 28 

III.  Capacity  of  the  earth  under  a  civilized  cultivation.     Surplus  of 
consumers.  Laborers.   House-keepers  and  heads  of  families.   Ratio 
of  increase  in  U.  S.    G.  Britain.    Ireland      -  -  -  -  28,  29 

Effect  of  republican  laws  of  descent  and  distribution  in  equalizing 
property,  and  in  reducing  to  the  minimum  mutual  surpluses  for 
mutual  supplies.    Assumed  population  of  U.  S.  and  extent  of  their 
territory.     The  future  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  29,  30 

To  Samuel  S.  Lewis.    February  16  -  -  -  -  -  30 

"  Washington  College  Parthenon "        -  -  -  -  -30,31 

To  John  Quincy  Adams.   Montpellier,  February  24  -  -  31 

Correspondence  of  A.  with  "  several  citizens  of  Massachusetts."   Gov. 
Plumer's  letter.    Strong  doubt  as  to  correctness  of  statement  con- 
cerning A.  Hamilton    -  -  -  -  -  -  -  31,  32 

To  Benjamin  Waterhouse.   Montpellier,  March  12    -  -  -  32 

W.'a  Inaugural  Discourse.    Its  latinity.    Scenes  "  from  which  corners 

of  the  veil  are  already  lifted."     Death  of  witnesses-  -  -  32,  33 

To  John  Quincy  Adams.    March  13-  -  -  -  -  -33 

Letters  from  A.  to  Bacon.    A  letter  of  Jefferson  to  Giles.    Suggested 
explanation  of  J.'s  anachronisms        -  -  -  -  -  33,  34 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    March  19 34 

Supplemental  letters  of  Jefferson.    Norfolk  Herald.    "  Hampden." 
Reasons  for  abstaining  from  further  remarks.    University.    Profes- 
sor Long.  Dr.  Harrison.    Quincy.   Pendleton's  "  Danger  not  over." 
Pollard.    J.  Taylor     ------ 

To  William  Madison,  Chairman,  &c.  Montpellier,  March  25 

Nomination  for  Convention        ------ 

To  Benjamin  Romaine.    April  14      - 

Views  of  a  party,  1803 — 1815.    Constitutional  Reform 
To  Elliott  Cresson.    April  23 

Sentiment  for  his  Album  -  - 

To  Jonathan  Leonard.   Montpellier,  April  28 

L.'s  "  History  of  Dedham."    Revisal  of  Constitution  of  Virginia 
To  Baron  de  Neuville.    June  15       - 

Introduces  W.  C.  Rives,  Envoy,  &c,  to  France 
To  Gen.  La  Fayette.  June  15  - 

Contrasted  policy  of  England  and  France  toward  the  Greeks.    T.  J. 
Randolph's  proposed  publication.    Jefferson's  writings.    French 


34,  35, 

36 

- 

36 

-36, 

,37 

- 

37 

-37, 

-  38 

- 

38 

- 

38 

- 

38 

- 

38 

- 

39 

- 

39 

- 

39 

vi  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1 830. —  Continued. 
edition.  Monticello  affairs.  Mrs.  Randolph.    N.  Trist.    Le  Vasseur. 

R-Ves.    Health 39,40,41 

To  John  Finch.  Montpellier,  June  20  -----        41 

F.'s  observations  on  the  "  Natural  boundaries  of  Empires  "    -  -        41 

To  Albert  Gallatin.    Montpellier,  July  13    -  -  -  -  -        41 

Introduction  of  W.  C.  Rives        - 41,42 

To  Professor  Tucker.    Montpellier,  July  20  -  -  -  -  -        42 

Sends  copy  of  original  draft  of  present  constitution  of  Virginia.  George 
Mason.    Museum  .------42 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.   Montpellier,  August  16  -  -  -  -        42 

C.;s  speech.     [Chapman?]     Johnson.    Virginia  doctrine  in  1798-'99. 
Jefferson  on  the  Tariff.    Arbiter  or  umpire,  &c.    Federalist  No.  39. 
S.  Carolina  favorable  to  duties  for  encouraging  navigation.    The 
Virginia  doctrine  compared  with  present  doctrine  in  S.  Carolina. 
Late  resolution  of  Virginia  Legislature         -  -  -  43,  44 

To  Thomas  S.  Hinde.    Montpellier,  August  17  -  -  44 

Erroneous  rumor  that  M.  is  writing  a  history  of  U.  S.    His  materials 

for  it.     Burr's  conspiracy     ------         45 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.     Montpellier,  September  7   -  -  -  -        45 

Rival  jurisdiction  claimed  by  Courts  of  Appeals.  Judges  Roane,  W. 
H.  Cabell,  and  Coalter.  Virginia  doctrine  in  98-99.  Constitutional 
Union.  Right  to  judge  in  last  resort  concerning  usurpations,  &c, 
referred  by  that  doctrine  to  the  parties  to  compact.  Right  of  re- 
sistance. Difference  of  disputes  between  different  branches  of  the 
same  Government  from  disputes  between  different  Govornments  -  47 
Former  correspondence  with  Judge  Roane.  "  Algernon  Sidney." 
"Hampden."  Gov.  Tyler.  Morris.  Pollard.  "The  danger  not 
over."  Robert  Taylor.  Pendleton.  Jefferson.  Explanation.  Fed- 
eralist, No.  39  - 47,  48,  49 

Speech  in  the  Virginia  State  Convention  of  1829-'30,  on  the  question 
op  the  Ratio  of  Representation  in  the  two  branches  of  the  Legis- 
lature.   Dec.  2,  1829      ------  51 — 55 

1830.— [P.  57—142.] 

To  C  J.  Ingersoll.    Richmond,  January  8    -  -  -  -  -        57 

Cases  of  exercise  of  Executive  power  without  intervention  of  Judi- 
ciary.   Marshall's  speech  in  case  of  Jonathan  Robbins.    Virginia 
Convention.    Taxing  of  colored  population  -  -  -  -  57,  58 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    February      -------        58 

Virginia  resolutions  1798-'99.    Doctrines  of  self-government  at  com- 
mencement of  Revolution.    Virginia  declaration  of  rights.    Hume        58 
To  Gen.  La  Fayette.    February  1-  -  -  -  -  -58 

Virginia  Convention.  Difficulties.  Probability  that  the  amended 
Constitution  will  be  adopted.  Monroe.  Marshall.  Sensibility  on 
the  slavery  question.  Colonization  Society.  Struggle  in  Europe, 
&c.    Le  Vasseur 58,  59,  60,  61 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV  vii 

PAGE 

1830. —  Continued. 
To  N.  P.  Trist.    Montpellier,  February  15     -  -  -  -  -        61 

Virginia  Resolutions  in  '98-'99.  Object  of  the  writer.  Error  in  ex- 
pounding Constitution  of  U.  S.  Its  peculiar  character.  Divided 
sovereignty       --------  61,  6j 

Operation  on  persons  and  things.  Provision  for  deciding  controver- 
sies concerning  partition  line  between  powers  of  Federal  and  State 
governments.  Federalist,  No.  39.  Supreme  Court  U.  S.  To  be 
acquiesced  in  till  a  better  tribunal,  deriving  its  authority  from  the 
whole,  can  be  substituted.  Political  compact.  Nature,  &c,  of  a 
compact.  View  of,  &c,  as  between  the  individuals  of  a  community. 
Obligations  of  all  and  remedy  in  extreme  cases  of  violation.  Vir- 
ginia statute  of  expatriation.  The  principle  applied  to  case  of  U.  S. 
The  compact  being  among  individuals  as  imbodied  into  States. 
Compact  can  be  dissolved  only  by  consent  of  parties,  or  by  usur- 
pations or  abuses,  &c,  &c.      -----        62,  63,  64 

As  much  right  on  one  side  to  expound  a  compact,  and  to  insist  on  its 
fulfilment  according  to  that  exposition,  as  on  the  other,  so  to  ex- 
pound it  as  to  furnish  a  release  from  it.  Attempt  of  one  of  the 
parties  to  annul  it,  is  giving  to  the  other  parties  the  option  of  ac- 
quiescing in  the  annulment,  or  of  preventing  it.  Vital  importance 
of  this  consideration  to  the  Federal  Government,  the  Union,  and 
the  hopes  of  liberty  and  humanity.  Supposed  cases  of  secession, 
&c.    Virginia,  Pennsylvania,  N.  York,  Massachusetts,  &c.  -  -  64,  65 

Rights  of  parties  to  a  mere  league.    Jefferson.     Surprise  and  sorrow 

at  proceedings  in  S.  Carolina.    Nullification.     Secession     -  -  65,  66 

To  Robert  Lee.   Montpellier,  February  22   -  -  -  -  -        66 

Re-eligibility  of  President  of  U.  S.  General  remark.    Process  of  elec- 
tion.  Appointing  power.   Inconveniences  inseparable  from  the  pe- 
culiarity of  a  Federal  polity.   Such  a  Government  essential  to  com- 
plete success  of  republicanism  in  any  form   -  -  -  -  66,  67 
To  Mr.  McDuffie.   Montpellier,  March  30      -            -            -            -            -        67 

Report  on  state  of  public  finances.  Dissent  from  some  theoretic  views 

in  it.     Tariff.    Pre-supposition  in  the  theory  of  "  let  us  alone  "      -        67 
To  Jared  Sparks.   Montpellier,  April  8         -  -  -  -  -        68 

Materials  at  London  and  Paris  for  history  of  our  Revolution.  Letters 
from  Washington  to  M.    Invitation.    Storrow  -  -  -        68 

To  Mrs.  E.  Coolidge.    Montpellier,  April  8   -  -  -  -  -        68 

Review  of  Jefferson's  correspondence.  Relations  between  one  gener- 
ation and  another        -  -  -  -  -  -  -  68,  69 

To  Edward  Everett.    Montpellier,  April  8     -  -  -  -  -        69 

Late  speeches  of  Webster  and  Sprague.    Lights  and  errors  of  the  de- 
bates on  Foot's  resolution       ------        70 

To  Professor  Tucker.    Montpellier,  April  30  -  -  -  -        70 

First  acquaintance  with  Jefferson.    Correspondence.    Ceracchi  -  70,  71 

To  E.  Everett.    Montpellier,  April    ------        72 


viii  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

TAGE. 

1830.—  Continued. 
Virginia  resolutions,  &o.,  1798-99.  Reasons  for  not  correcting  erro- 
neous views  taken  of  them.  Correspondence  with  11.  V.  llavne. 
J.  M.  Clayton.  Distinction  between  character  of  present  charge  of 
usurpations  and  abuses  of  power,  and  of  charge  against  the  Alien 
and  Sedition  Laws       -  -  -  -  -  -  -  72,  73 

To  M.  L.  Hurlbert,     Montpellier,  May  -----        73 

Pamphlet.    Phrases  "We,  the  people,"  and  "common  defence  and 
general  welfare,"  not  to  be  taken  as  measures  of  powers  of  General 
Government.   Those  powers  to  be  found  in  the  specifications  under 
a  construction  neither  strict  nor  loose.    Rules  for  interpreting  the 
Constitution  of  U.  S.    -  -  -  -  -  -  -73,74 

Peculiar  structure  of  the  Government  of  U.  S.  Constitution  created 
by  the  people  composing  distinct  States  and  acting  by  a  majority  in 
each.  Its  authority  in  each  State.  Not  revocable,  &c,  at  the  will 
of  the  States  individually.  Division  of  sovereign  powers  between 
the  Government  of  TJ.  S.  and  the  governments  of  individual  .States. 
Government  operates  directly  on  persons  and  things,  and  has  com- 
mand of  a  physical  force  for  executing  its  powers.  Necessity  of  a 
provision  for  a  peaceable  and  authoritative  decision  of  contro- 
versies as  to  the  landmarks  of  jurisdiction  between  the  U.  S.  Gov- 
ernment and  the  State  governments.  Paramount  authority  of  U.  S. 
Constitution,  laws,  &c.  Seat  of  appellate  supremacy.  Safeguards 
against  usurpations  and  abuses  of  power  by  Government  of  U.  S. 
Ulterior  resort.     Ultima  ratio  -  -  -  -  -75,76 

To  James  Hillhouse.  Montpellier,  May,  -----  77 
Proposed  amendments  to  Constitution  of  U.  S.  Probable  objection  of 
the  large  States  to  an  equality  in  the  Senate  in  appointment  of  the 
Chief  Magistrate.  Danger  of  State  partialities.  Certainty  of  inju- 
rious suspicions.  Deficiency  in  qualifications.  Impairment  of  ad- 
vantage expected  from  the  veto  power.  Adverse  views  and  feelings 
between  Senate  and  President.  Tendency  to  discord  between  Pres- 
ident and  Cabinet.  General  prospects  as  to  result  of  Presidential 
contests  -  -  -  -  -  -  -        77,  78,  79 

To  Edward  Livingston.    May  8-  -  -  -  -  -80 

Virginia  proceedings  in  1798-99  and  the  nullifying  doctrine.   Sources 

of  error  in  comments  on  those  proceedings    -  -  -  -        80 

To  George  McDuffie.    May  8 -        81 

Report  on  Bank  of  U.  S.  Precedents.  Plea  that  the  chain  had  been 
broken  in  a  particular  instance.  A  circumstance  in  its  history. 
Passage  in  the  report.  Specie  currency  and  currency  not  convert- 
ible into  specie  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  81.  S2 

To  President  Monroe.    Montpellier,  May  18-  -  -  -  -        82 

Health.  University.  Law  Chair.  New  constitution  of  Virginia. 
Sparks.  Diplomatic  correspondence  during  the  Confederation  Se- 
cret archives  of  G.  B.  and  France  during  our  Revolutionary  contest 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  [s 

PACE. 

1830. —  Continued. 
Jay's  erroneous  views  of  the  course  of  France  in  the  negotiations 
for  peace.     Rayncval's  statements     -  -  -  -  -  82,  83 

To  Thomas  Ritchie.    Montpellier,  .May  24    -  -  -  -  -        83 

M.'s  "Protest"  not  against  the  "Proclamation  of  neutrality,*'  but 

against  the  construction  of  it  by  "  I'acificus"  -  -  -  83,  84 

To  Daniel  Webster.    May  27 84 

W.'s  speech  [on  Foot's  resolution.]  M.'s  correspondence  with  [Ilayne 
and]  Everett.    Peculiarity  of  actual  system  of  Government  for  TJ. 

S.  -  -  - 84,85 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    May  31 85 

Correspondence  [with  llayne.]     Nullifying  doctrine  of  S.  Carolina. 
Proceedings  of  Virginia  in  1798-99.     Letter  of  Jefferson  to  Nich- 
olas. M.'s  veto  in  1817  against  internal  improvements  by  Congress. 
Lomax  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  85,  8C 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    Montpellier,  June  3  -  -  -  -  -  -        87 

Veto  in  1S17  meant  to  deny  as  well  the  appropriating  as  the  executing 
and  jurisdictional  branches  of  the  power.     Address  of  Virginia  As- 
sembly in  ;98.    Term  "  nullification  "  in  Kentucky  resolutions  of 
seventeen  hundred  and  ninety-nine.     Letter  of  Jefferson  to  W.  C. 
Nicholas  ...-----87 

To  M.  Van  Buren.    Montpellier,  June  3         -  -  -  -  -        88 

President's  message.    Veto  in  1817        -  -  -  -  -        88 

To  General  W.  H.  Harrison.     Montpelier,  June  5     -  -  -  88 

Charges  against  H.  while  Minister  to  Colombia.    His  letter  to  Boli- 
var       -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  88,  89 

To  M.  Van  Buren.    Montpellier,  July  5         -  -  -  -  -        89 

President's  construction  of  veto  of  1S17.    Rule  as  to  power  of  appro- 
priating money.    Rule  as  to  grants  for  light-houses  and  improve- 
ment of  harbors  and  rivers       -----       89,90,91 

Considerations  as  to  expediency  of  refusing  appropriations  with  view 
to  previous  discharge  of  public  debt.     Surplus  revenue.    Subscrip- 
tions by  U.  S.  to  stock  of  private  companies.    Constitutional  power 
of  Congress  over  roads  and  canals.     Policy  of  vesting  in  Congress 
power  over  internal  improvements.    Public  lands    -  -  -  92,  93 

To  Hyde  de  Neuville.    Montpellier,  July  26  -  -  93 

Chersant.    French  pamphlets.    New  constitution  of  Virginia  adopted 
by  the  People  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  93,  94 

To  Edward  Everett.    Montpellier,  August  5  -  -  -  -  -        94 

E.'s  address  on  a  centennial  anniversary,  and  speech  on  the  Indian 

subject  ---------94 

To  Edward  Everett.    Montpellier,  August    -----        95 

Nullifying  doctrine.  Proceedings  of  Virginia  Legislature  in  1798  and 
1799.  Constitution  of  U.  S.  neither  a  consolidated  nor  a  confed- 
erated Government,  but  a  mixture  of  both.  Its  characteristic  pe- 
culiarities.    1.  Formed  by  the  people  in  each  State  acting  in  their 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 


1830. —  Continued. 
highest  sovereign  capacity      ------        95 

lias  within  each  State  the  same  authority  as  the  constitution  of  the 
State.  Is  a  compact  among  the  States,  constitutes  the  people  thereof 
one  people  for  certain  purposes,  and  cannot  be  altered  or  annulled 
at  the  will  of  the  States  individually  -  -  -  -  -  95,  96 

2.  It  divides  Ijhe  supreme  powers  of  government  between  the  Govern- 
ment of  U.  S.  and  the  Governments  of  individual  States.  Powers  of 
war,  of  taxation,  of  commerce,  of  treaties,  and  other  sovereign  pow- 
ers vested  in  Government  of  U.  S.  Its  organization  into  legislative, 
executive,  and  judiciary  departments.  Operates  "  directly  on  per- 
sons and  things,"  and  "  has  at  command  a  physical  force  for  execu- 
ting the  powers  committed  to  it "  -  -  -  -        96 

Provision  for  expected  controversies  concerning  the  boundaries  of  ju- 
risdiction between  the  General  and  the  State  Governments.  Neces- 
sity for  a  peaceable  and  authoritative  termination  of  such  contro- 
versies -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  96,  97 

Why  this  authority  should  not  be  vested  in  each  of  the  States.  Uni- 
form authority  of  the  laws  a  vital  principle.  Example  of  an  impost 
or  an  excise.  Lessons  of  experience.  Effects  of  a  loss  of  the  gen- 
eral authority  of  the  Government  of  U.  S.  Illustrations.  Why  the 
decisions  by  the  individual  States  should  not  have  been  made  in  all 
cases  co-ordinate  with  decisions  by  the  United  States  -  -        97 

Objections  against  referring  clashing  decisions  to  the  States  as  parties 
to  the  Constitution;  and  against  trusting  to  negotiation  for  adjusting 
disputes  between  the  Government  of  U.  S.  and  the  State  govern- 
ments, as  between  independent  and  separate  Governments-  -  97,  98 

Provisions  in  Constitution  of  U.  S.  for  its  operation :  1.  Supremacy 
of  the  U.  S.  Constitution,  laws,  and  treaties.  2.  Their  binding  force 
on  the  Judges  of  every  State.  3.  Extent  of  the  judicial  power  of 
U.  S.  to  all  cases  in  law  or  equity  arising  under  the  U.  S.  Constitu- 
tion, laws,  and  treaties  -  -  -  -  -  -  98,  99 

Provisions  for  securing  the  rights  and  powers  of  the  States  in  their  in- 
dividual capacities  :  1.  Responsibility  of  Senators  and  Representa- 
tives in  Congress  to  the  Legislatures  and  people  of  the  States.  2. 
Responsibility  of  President  to  people  of  U.  S.  3.  Liableness  of 
Executive  and  Judicial  functionaries  of  U.  S.  to  impeachment;  and 
independence,  on  the  part  of  the  State  functionaries,  of  the  agency 
or  authority  of  U.  S.     -  -  -  -  -  -  -        99 

Hitherto  a  sufficient  control  in  the  popular  will  over  the  Executive 
and  Legislative  departments  of  the  General  Government.  Case  of 
the  Alien  and  Sedition  laws.  Other  laws.  Complaints  against  the 
results  of  the  sympathy,  &c,  of  the  constituent  with  the  represent- 
ative body  in  the  Legislative  policy  of  the  nation    -  -  99,  100 

Judicial  power  of  U.  S.,  and  authority  of  Supreme  Court  respecting 
boundary  of  jurisdiction.  "  Federalist,"  No.  39.    Experience.   The 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  x[ 

PAGE. 

1830. —  Continued. 
course  of  the  Judiciary,  with  but  few  exceptions,  has  been  hitherto 
sustained  by  the  predominant  sense  of  the  nation     ...      100 

Inefficiency  of  a  supremacy  in  a  law  of  the  land  without  a  supremacy 
in  the  exposition  and  execution  of  the  law.  Want  of  it  destructive 
to  all  equipoise  between  the  Government  of  U.  S.  and  the  State  Gov- 
ernments, and  why      -------      101 

In  case  of  usurpations  and  abuses  on  the  part  of  U.  S.,  the  final  resort 
within  the  purview  of  the  Constitution  lies  in  an  amendment  of  the 
Constitution,  according  to  a  process  applicable  by  the  States.  On 
failure  of  every  constitutional  resort,  and  an  accumulation  of  usur- 
pations and  abuses  rendering  passive  obedience  and  non-resistence 
a  greater  evil  than  resistence  and  revolution,  the  resort  is  an  ap- 
peal to  original  rights  and  the  law  of  self-preservation,  the  "ultima 
ratio  "  under  all  Governments.  In  such  an  extremity,  and  in  such 
only,  a  single  member  of  the  Union  would  have  a  right,  as  an  ex- 
tra and  ultra-constitutional  right,  to  make  the  appeal  -  -      101 

The  nullifying  doctrine  stated :  A  claim  for  a  single  State  of  a  right 
to  appeal  against  an  exercise  of  power  by  the  Government  of  U.  S., 
decided  by  the  State  to  be  unconstitutional,  to  the  parties  of  the 
constitutional  compact;  the  decision  of  the  State  to  have  the  effeot 
of  nullifying  the  act  of  the  Government  of  U.  S.,  unless  the  decision 
of  the  State  be  reversed  by  three-fourths  of  the  parties        -  101,  102 

Authority  in  Constitution  to  two-thirds  of  the  States  to  institute,  and 
three-fourths  to  effectuate,  an  amendment  of  Constitution.    Import 
of  the  nullifying  doctrine.    Effect,  to  enable  the  smallest  fraction 
over  one-fourth  of  the  U.  S.  to  give  the  law  and  even  the  Constitu- 
tion to  all  the  others,  each  of  which  others  has  an  equal  right  with 
each  of  the  fraction  over  one-fourth  to  expound  it,  and  to  insist  on 
the  exposition  --------      102 

onstitution  was  proposed  to  the  people  of  the  States  as  a  whole,  and 
unanimously  adopted  by  the  States  as  a  whole.  Provision  as  to 
amendments.  Two  cases  in  which  unanimity  is  required.  Consti- 
tution adopted  as  a  whole,  on  reciprocal  concessions.  Certain  re- 
jection of  many  parts  if  separately  proposed.  Effect  of  expunction 
by  a  small  proportion  of  States  of  parts  of  the  Constitution  particu- 
larly valued  by  a  large  majority.  As  to  a  limitation  of  the  doctrine 
to  cases  of  construction.     Principle  and  application  of  the  plea     102,  103 

Reply,  &c:  The  Constitution  a  compact,  to  be  expounded  according 
to  the  provision  for  expounding  it,  making  a  part  of  the  compact; 
the  expounding  provision  as  obligatory  as  any  other  part  of  it. 
Right  of  renunciation  in  the  last  resort  -  103,  101 

Erroneous  construction  of  Virginia  proceedings  in  1798-99.  Distinc- 
tion between  the  governments  of  the  States  and  the  States  in  the 
sense  in  which  they  were  parties  to  the  Constitution;  between  the 
rights  of  the  parties  in  their  concurrent  and  in  their  individual 


xii  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1830. —  Continued. 
capacities;  between  the  several  modes  and  objects  of  interposition 
against  abuses  of  power;  especially  between  interpositions  within 
purview  of  Constitution,  and  interpositions  appealing  from  Consti- 
tution to  rights  of  nature         ------      104 

True  exposition  of  Virginia  Resolutions  and  Report.  Debates  in  II.  of 
Delegates  and  Address  of  the  two  Houses  disclose  no  reference  what- 
ever to  a  constitutional  right  in  an  individual  State  to  arrest,  by- 
force,  the  operation  of  a  law  of  U.  S.    Desired  concert  among  the 
States  for  redress  against  Alien  and  Sedition  laws,  as  acts  of  usurped 
power.  Immediate  object  that  of  inviting  the  other  States  to  concur 
in  declaring  those  laws  to  be  unconstitutional,  and  to  co-operate  by 
necessary  and  -proper  measures  iu  maintaining,  &c,  rights,  &c,  re- 
served to  the  States  and  the  people.    Expunction  of  certain  words 
originally  contained  in  one  of  the  Resolutions.    Nothing  in  Address 
of  Legislature  looking  to  means  of  maintaining  State  rights  beyond 
regular  means  within  forms  of  Constitution.    Answers  to  the  Reso- 
lutions by  States  protesting  against  them,  mainly  directed  against 
assumed  authority  of  a  State  Legislature  to  declare  a  law  of  U.  S. 
to  be  unconstitutional.    Inference      -  1$'*.  105 

To  Edward  Everett.    Montpellier,  August  20  -  -  -  -      106 

Answers  of  States  to  Virginia  Resolutions  of  '98.    Jefferson  and  the 
Kentucky  Resolutions  of  1799.  The  word  "nullification  "  not  in  the 
Kentucky  Resolutions  of  '98  penned  by  him.  Debates  in  Virginia  H. 
of  Delegates  on  Resolutions  of  '98;  Address  of  the  two  Houses;  Re- 
port of  a  committee  of  S.  Carolina  H.  of  Representatives,  December 
9,  1828.    Protest  of  minority  in  Virginia  Legislature  of  '98.   Objec- 
tion to  public  use  of  a  letter.    Promise  of  a  further  letter  to  E.     106,  107 
To  Thomas  W.  Gilmer.    September  6  -----      107 

Public  education.    Bill  for  "  diffusion  of  knowledge  "  in  code  of  Jef- 
ferson, Wythe,  and  Pendleton.   Primary  schools.   Examples  in  New 
England,  New  York,  and  Pennsylvania.    Proposed  plan  in  Mary- 
land.   Sources  of  difficulty  in  Southern  States.    Suggestions  as  to 
mode  of  proceeding     ------  108,  109 

To  Edward  Everett.    September  10  -  -  -  -  -  -      109 

Correction  as  to  Jefferson  and  "  nullification."    MS.  paper  of  J.    His 
printed  letter  to  W.  C.  Nicholas.    Sense  in  which  he  is  supposed  to 
have  used  the  term      ------  109,  110 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    Montpellier,  September  23  -  -  -  -  -      110 

Suggests  recall  of  T.'s  communication  to  National  Intelligencer.    Let- 
ter lately  noticed  from  Jefferson,  November  7,  '99,  enclosing  "  copy 
of  draught  of  the  Kentucky  resolves."    Its  differences  from  the  Ken- 
tucky resolutions  of  both  '98  and  '99.    Conjecture,  &c.    Business 
matters.    Essay  on  "  Distress  for  rent  in  Virginia  "  -  -  110,  111 

To  Mrs.  Margaret  M.  Smith.    September       -  -  -  -  -      111 

First  acquaintance  with  Jefferson.    Reminiscences.    Memoranda  by  J. 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 


xiu 

fAGE. 


1830. —  Continued. 
and  himself  of  their  trip  in  1791  to  the  borders  of  Canada.  Scenes, 
&c.,  in  Congress.  New  Constitution.  J.'s  remark  as  to  a  hereditary 
Chief  Magistracy.  Mrs.S.'sson.  Dr.  Thornton.  Mr.  Smith.  Diffi- 
culty in  writing  111,.  112, 113 

To  William  AVirt.   Montpellier,  October  1     -  -  -  -  -      113 

W.'s  address  to  the  two  societies  of  Rutgers  College,  and  opinion  on 
Cherokee  case.  Regret  at  some  argumentative  appeals  to  the  minds 
of  the  Indians.    Plea  for  dispossessing  them  of  land  on  which  they 
have  lived,  that  they  have  not  appropriated  it  to  themselves.    An- 
swer to  this  plea.  Difficulty  of  reconciling  their  interests  with  their 
rights.    Recommendation  of  their  removal,  made  voluntary  by  ade- 
quate inducements,  to  another  home,  &c.       -  -  -  113,  114 
To  Jared  Sparks.    October  5            -        .    -           -           -           -  -      114 

S.'s  tour  to  Quebec.    Copy  of  draught  of  address  prepared  by  Pres- 
ident Washington  in  1792,  when  he  meditated  a  retirement  at  the 
end  of  his  first  term.    North  American  Review  for  January,  1830. 
"  Life  of  Mr.  Jay."    Delaplaine.    Fallibility  of  Hamilton's  memory 
in  allotting  the  Nos.  in  "  The  Federalist "  to  their  respective  au- 
thors.   No.  64  and  other  numbers.    Monroe.    Rayneval     -  114,  115 
To  Edward  Everett.    Montpellier,  October  7            -            -            -  -      115 

North  American  Review.  Review  of  Debates.  Correction  of  an  error 
in  M.'s  printed  letter;  and  of  E.'s  statement  respecting  the  author- 
ship of  the  "  Federalist."    The  greater  number  of  the  papers  writ- 
ten by  Hamilton.    Gideon's  edition  -  115,  116 
To  M.  Van  Buren.    October  9           -----  -      H6 

Constitutional  question  respecting  Internal  Improvements.    Veto  of 
1817.    President  Jackson's  message  -  116,  117 

To  Henry  Clay.    Montpellier,  October  9        -  -  -  -  -      117 

C.'s  address  at  Cincinnati.  Regulations  of  Kentucky  in  '98-99.  "  Nul- 
lifying doctrine."  "Its  hideous  aspect  and  fatal  tendency."  Letter 
to  E.  Everett     --------      117 

To  William  Wirt.    October  12 117 

Cause  of  the  Cherokees.  Indian  relations  and  the  national  character. 
Restriction  on  sale  of  Indian  lands    -  -  -  -  nj)  H8 

To  C.  J.  Ingersoll,  Clement  C.  Biddle,  Richard  Peters— Committee  of  the 

Penn  Society.    Montpellier,  October  13  -  118 

Invitation  to  anniversary  dinner.    Toast  to  the  memory  of  Penn       -      118 

To .  Montpellier,  November  8  -  -  -  -119 

Stevenson.    Judicial  power  of  U.  S.  in  criminal  cases.    Necessity  of 
a  power  under  the  general  authority  to  decide  on  conflicting  claims 
between  the  Federal  and  State  courts.    Charge  against  M.'s  letter, 
&c.    Report  of '99       -------      119 

To  Andrew  Stevenson.    Montpellier,  November  27  -  -  -  -      120 

Advantage  of  frankness.  View  of  the  origin  of  the  phrase  "  common 
defence  and  general  welfare."     True  punctuation  of  the  clause. 


Xiv  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE 

1830.—  Continued. 
Newspaper  criticism  on  letter  to  Everett.  Papers  relating  to  the 
Constitution,  &c.  Report  of  '99.  Distinction  between  authority  of 
a  higher  tribunal  to  decidr  on  extent  of  its  own  jurisdiction,  com- 
pared with  that  of  other  tribunals,  and  claim  of  jurisdiction  in  any 
particular  case  or  description  of  cases  as  witbin  that  extent  120,  121 

To  Andrew  Stevenson.    Montpellier,  November  27  -  -  -  -      121 

History  and  import  of  the  terms  "  common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare," in  Constitution  of  U.  S.  References  to  printed  journal  of  Con- 
vention.   Resolutions,  reports,  &c.    -  121,  122,  123,  124 

Reasoning.  Conclusion  that  these  are  general  terms,  explained  and 
limited  by  subjoined  specifications.  Practice  of  Revolutionary  Con- 
gress. Wilson's  pamphlet.  "  Considerations  on  the  Bank  of  North 
America" 124,125,126,127 

Sense  in  which  the  terms  were  used  by  the  framers  of  the  Constitution, 
and  understood  by  the  ratifying  Conventions.  Declarations  of  rights. 
Amendments  by  a  majority  of  the  States        ...  128,  129 

Action  in  the  first  session  of  the  First  Congress,  when  the  subject  of 
amendments  was  taken  up.  R.  H.  Lee's  letters  to  Samuel  Adams 
and  to  [Edmund  Randolph,]  Governor  of  Virginia.  Inference  from 
his  silence  in  the  U.  S.  Senate  as  to  the  danger  of  the  terms.  Key 
to  the  sound  interpretation  of  Constitution  of  U.  S.    Warning,  &c. 

130,  131 
Memorandum  not  used  in  Letter  to  Mr.  Stevenson  ...      131 

Argument  drawn  from  the  punctuation  in  some  editions  of  the  Con- 
stitution. Semicolons  and  commas.  Facts,  &c,  showing  that  the 
true  reading  of  the  Constitution  is  that  which  unites  the  parts  of  the 
clause  containing  the  terms,  "  common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare "    132,  133 

Supplement  to  Letter  of  November  27,  1830,  on  the  phrase,  "  Common 

Defence  and  General  Welfare."    On  the  Power  of  Indefinite  Ap- 
propriation of  Money  by  Congress       -                                            134 — 139 
To  J.  K.  TefTt.    December  3  -  - 139 

Bevan.  Savannah  Georgian.  Pierce's  notes  in  Convention  of  1787. 
Answer  to  a  suggestion  of  inconsistency.  Distinction  between  an 
absolute  and  a  qualified  veto    -----  139,  140 

To  James  Maury.    Montpellier,  December  10  140 

Convention  at  Richmond.  Project  of  annexing  to  Maryland  the  north- 
western counties  on  the  Ohio.  Discontents  with  the  tariff  and  with 
expenditures  on  roads  and  canals.  Virginia.  Violent  spirit,  &c, 
in  S.  Carolina.    Unsupported  by  other  States  ...      140 

To  Gen.  La  Fayette.     Montpellier,  December  12      -  141 

Ruggi.  T.  Jefferson  Randolph.  The  "  three  glorious  days  of  July." 
Probable  necessity  of  the  constitutional  monarchy  adapted  to  the 
actual  condition  of  France.  Jefferson's  approbation  of  the  system 
which  left  Louis  XVI  on  the  throne.    Suggestion  of  a  "  Federal 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xv 

PAGE. 

1830. —  Continued. 
mixture."     The  nullifying  doctrine  of  S.  Carolina.     Virginia  pro- 
ceedings in  '98-99        ------  141,  142 

1831.— [P.  142—214.] 

To  Richard  Rush         --------       142 

"  Temple."  Whig  party  in  England.  Lord  Grey.  Comparative 
strength  of  the  British  Government.    Personal,  &c-  -  142,143 

To  Reynolds  Chapman.    January  6  -'  -  -  -  -  -      143 

John  M.  Patton's  MS.  Letters  to  Cabell  in  1828  on  a  tariff  for  encour- 
aging domestic  manufactures.  Considerations.  Evils  of  existing 
tariff,  and  exaggeration  of  them.  Extensive  impression  that  the 
whole  amount  paid  by  the  consumers  goes  into  pockets  of  the  man- 
ufacturers, is  true  only  as  to  articles  actually  manufactured  in  the 
country.  Unequal  operation  of  the  tax  arising  from  an  unequal  con- 
sumption, in  different  sections,  of  the  article  paying  it.  Countervail- 
ing considerations.     Examples.  &c.    -  -  -  -  143,  144,  145 

Great  and  radical  causes  of  the  pervading  embarrassments :  1.  Fall  in 
price  of  land.  2.  Depreciating  effect  in  products  of  land  from  in- 
creased products  resulting  from  rapid  increase  of  population,  and 
transfer  of  labor  from  a  less  productive  to  a  more  productive  soil, 
&c.  Export  of  tobacco  through  New  Orleans.  The  "  Southern  Re- 
view."    Fall  in  prices  of  tobacco,  flour,  and  cotton  -  145,146 

General  indebtment.    Bank  loans,  &c.     War,  peace,  and  the  "  let 

alone  "  theory.    Veto  of  the  "  Bonus  bill"  in  1817  -  -  -      146 

Doubts,  &c,  in  expounding  Constitution  of  U.  S.  Its  peculiar  char- 
acter. Legislative  department.  Extreme  and  adverse  rules  of  con- 
struction. The  intermediate  course  the  true  one.  Internal  im- 
provements. Post  roads.  Canals  admitted  by  Hamilton  to  be  be- 
yond the  sphere  of  Federal  legislation  ...  147  f  143 

Light-houses  and  harbors  of  a  certain  character.     "  The  Mississippi 

the  commercial  highway  of  half  the  nation  "  148,  149 

Abstract  opinion  in  favor  of  vesting  in  Congress  power  as  to  Canals. 
Proposition  for  it  in  Convention  of  17S7.  Why  rejected.  Reasons 
why  it  might  properly  have  been  adopted    -  -  -  -      149 

Considerations  founded  on  the  abuse  of  the  power.  Casual  redund- 
ancy of  revenue,  &c.  Effect  on  the  public  mind  of  the  late  reduc- 
tion of  duties  on  certain  imports,  and  approach  of  extinguishment 
of  public  debt.  Importance,  on  several  accounts,  of  the  subject  of 
canals,  railroads,  and  turnpikes  -  149,  150 

To  Stephen  Bates.    January  24         -----  -      150 

Pamphlet.    Health.    Free  Masonry      ...  -  150,  151 

To  Robert  Walsh.    January  25  -  -  -  -  -  -      151 

Pamphlet  of  two  sons  of  James  A.  Bayard,  vindicating  memory  of 
their  father  against  certain  passages  in  Jefferson's  writings.  Ana- 
lytical, &c.,  examination  of  the  case  -  -  -  -         151 — 158 


xvi  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

L83L — Continued. 
To  Robert  Walsh       --------     169 

Encloses  the  foregoing  as  a  communication  to  the  National  Gazette  -      159 
To  Robert  Walsh.    January  31         ------      159 

Correction  of  a  clause  in  the  communication  of  January  25    -  -      159 

To  William  II.  Harrison.    Montpellier,  February  1  -  -  -  -      159 

Character,  <tc.,  of  General  Pike-  -  159,160 

To  C.  J.  Ingersoll.    Montpellier,  February  2  -  -  -  -      1G0 

State  power  to  make  Banks.  Cause  of  the  prohibition  in  Constitution 
U.S.  againsi  b  State's  issuing  bills  of  credit,  tec.  Federalist,  [No. 
•I  1.]  Effecl  of  depreciated  notes  of  State  Banks  in  crowding  out  a 
sound  medium-  ------  I <;o.  1G1 

Dissent  from  President  Jackson's  plan.    Kindred  ideas  of  Jefferson. 
Virginia  statutes  againsi  circulation  of  notes  payable  to  bearer     -      161 
To  Theodore  Sedgwick,  Jr.    Montpellier,  February  12  -  -      161 

W.  Livingston's  service  in  Convention  of  1787.  His  political  opin- 
ions.   His  two  sons,  William  ami  Brockholst.    "  The  Independent 

Reflector" 161,  1G2,  163 

To  Robert  Walsh.     February  15        ------      163 

Jefferson's  posture  in  1801.    Authorship  of  the  vindication  of  "him. 

National  Gazette.     Age  -----  163,  164 

To  C.  E.  Haynes.    Montpellier,  February  25  -  1G4 

Clayton's  Review  of  a  Report.     His  charge  of  inconsistency  repelled. 
Case  of  the  Bank.     Explanation  of  the  equality  of  votes  which  gav«' 
occasion  for  Vice  President  Clinton's  casting  vote  against  a  bill  es- 
tablishing a  bank         ------  164,  165 

To  James  Robertson.    March  27        ------      ice 

Authorship  of  the  Virginia  Resolutions  of  1798.  Excision,  by  the  If. 
of  Delegates,  of  the  word  "  alone,*"  in  3d  Resolution  as  penned  by 
the  author.  Reason  for  its  insertion  in  the  original  draught.  Rea- 
son for  using  the  plural  term  ••  State-."'  Excision  of  certain  words 
from  7th  Resolution,  and  inferences  from  the  supposition  that  they 
had  been  a  part  of  the  original  draught        ...  166,  1G7 

Bearing  of  7th  on  3d   Resolution.    Comments  not  provided  against, 
because  not  foreseen.    R.'s  proposed  task.    History  of  Articles  of 
Confederation  and  of  Constitution.    Pitkin.    Marshall.    Journals  of 
State  Legislatures  and  Conventions,  and  of  Federal  Convention, 
&c.    Erroneous  sketches  by  Fates  and  Martin.    Materials  in  pam- 
phlets and   newspaper  essays.      Historical  Societies.      I. Unary   of 
Philadelphia    -------  167,  168 

To  Jared  Sparks.    Montpellier.  April  8  168 

Gouverneur  Morris.  His  service  in  Convention  of  1787.  Ability,  elo- 
quence, and  political  opinions.  <  rave  tl finish  "  to  style  and  ar- 
rangement of  Constitution.  Erroneous  account  in  National  Intelli- 
gencer of  Franklin's  proposition  Cor  a  religious  service  in  the  Con- 
vention.    Question  as  to  rule  of  voting  in  the  Senatorial  branch  of 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  XVli 

PAGE. 

1831. —  Continued. 

the  Legislature.     The  "  Gordian  knot."    Supposed  interview,  &c, 

of  G.  Morris  with  Gen.  Washington  and  U.  Morris.    A  tradition.   G. 

M.'s  brilliancy,  candor,  &C.     A  pamphlet  by  him      -  -  1G9,  170 

To  James  Robertson.  Montpellier,  April  20-  -  -  -  -      171 

The  proper  way  to  understand  our  novel  and  complex  system  of  Gov- 
ernment.    Admission  of  new  States.     Original  domain.    Acquired 
territory.     Louisiana.     The  phrase  "  general  welfare  "        -  171,172 

For  Mr.  Paulding.     April       -------       172 

"Marvellous  identities"  in  a  plan  of  Government  proposed  by  C. 
Pinckney,  &c,  with  the  text  of  Constitution  as  finally  agreed  to. 
Pamphlet  entitled  "Observations  on  the  plan,  &c,  submitted,  &c, 
by  C.  Pinckney,"  &c.    Childa  ...  -  172,173 

To  J.  K.  Paulding.    Montpellier,  April  -----       173 

P.'s  Biographical  undertaking,  and  request  for  "  a  sketch  of  the  prin- 
cipal works"  of  J.  M.'s   life.     Sparks.     Washington.     Franklin 

173,  174,  175 
Jefferson.    J.Adams.    Hamilton.    Benson.    Gideon.    H.'s  erroneous 
distribution  of  the  papers  in  the  Federalist  to  their  respective  au- 
thors, e.  g.,  Nos.  49,  54,  64.     His  involuntary  misstatement  concern- 
ing his  draught  of  a  Constitution  put  into  J.  M.'s  hands       -  175,  176,  177 
To  James  Monroe.    Montpellier,  April  21     -  -  -  -  -      178 

Monroe's  proposed  removal  to  N.  York.    Settlement  by  Congress  of 
his  accounts.     Old  friendship,  &c.    University         -  -  178,  179 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    May  5  -------       179 

"  Mental  philosophy."     "  Distress  for  rent."    Revolution  in  the  Cab- 
inet.   Van  Buren.    E.  Livingston      -  -  -  -  -      179 

To  Charles  Carter  Lee.     May  -  -  -  -  -  -      180 

Friendly  relations  with  Gen.  Henry  Lee.     Wine  -  -  -      180 

To  Benjamin  Waterhouse.    May        ------      180 

W.'s  volume  on  the  authorship  of  "Junius."    Placed  in  library  of 
University         --------      180 

To  Jared  Sparks.    June  1  -  -  -  -  -  -      181 

Pamphlet  by  Gouverneur  Morris.    His  newspaper  writings  in  1780. 
Deane.    C.  Pinckney's  draught.    Few's  death  left  J.  M.  the  only 
living  signer  of  Constitution  U.  S.    Lansing's  mysterious  disappear- 
ance.   J.  M.  sole  survivor  of  members  of  Revolutionary  Congress 
and  of  Convention  1776,  which  formed  the  first  constitution  of  Vir- 
ginia    --------  181,  182 

To  J.  K.  Paulding.    June  6    -  -  -  -  -  -  -      182 

C.  Pinckney's  draught.    Ruftis  King     -  -  -  -  -      182 

To  J.  K.  Paulding.    June  27  -  -  -  -  -  -  -      182 

Receipt  of  C.  Pinckney's  pamphlet.     Has  in  view,  not  a  history,  &c. 
but  a  preservation  of  materials,  &c.   Proceedings  and  debates,  &c, 
&c.    Correspondence  ------  182,  183 

To  Mr.  Iugersoll.    Montpellier,  June  25  183 


xviii  CONTEXTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1831. —  Continued. 
President  Jackson's  views  as  to  a  Bank  of  U.  S.     Substitute.    Charge 
of  inconsistency  in  J.  M.  in  regard  to  a  Bank  of  U.  S.  Force  of  legis- 
lative precedents.    The  question  confounded  with  another.    Essen- 
tial difference.    Analogy  of  judicial  precedents,  and  reasons  for 
their  binding  influence           ....           -  183,184,185 
Legislator's  oath  to  support  the  Constitution.  Judge's  oath  to  support 
the  law.    A  given  course  of  practice  recognised  as  in  the  light  of  a 
legal  rule  of  interpreting  a  law.     Like  necessity  for  considering  it 
a  constitutional  rule  of  interpreting  a  Constitution  -           -  -      185 
Exceptional  cases  and  the  general  rule.    U.  S.  Bank  charter  of  1817. 
Alleged  interruption  of  precedents.    Vice  President  Clinton's  cast- 
ing vote  in  1811.    Reply 185,  18C,  187 

To .    June  22  -  - 187 

Claim  of  new  States  to  Federal  lands  within  their  limits,  unfair,  un- 
just. Are.,  Ac.    A  pending  election      -  187,188 
To  Dr.  John  W.  Francis.    Montpellier,  July  9          -           -           -  -      188 
Death  of  Monroe  on  the  fourth  of  July.     Tribute  to  his  memory         -      188 
To  Alexander  Hamilton.    July  9      -            -            -            -            -            -      188 

Death  of  Monroe,  Ac. 188,189 

To  Tench  Ringgold.    Montpellier,  July  12    -  -  -  -  -      189 

Death  of  Monroe.    Traits  of  his  character,  &c.  -  ...      189 

To  Governor  Stokes.    July  15  -----  -      190 

Sends  to  State  Library  a  copy  of  Lawson's  History  of  North  Carolina      190 
To  General  Bernard.    Montpellier,  July  16  -  -  -  -  -       190 

B.'s  merits  and  proposed  return  to  France        ....      190 

To  Andrew  Bigelow  --------       191 

B.'s  '•  election  sermon  6th  January."    "  The  Union  of  the  States,"  &c.      191 
To  Mathew  Carey.    Montpellier.  July  27        -  -  -  -  191 

C.'s  address  to  the  citizens  of  S.  Carolina.   Strange  doctrines  and  mis- 
conceptions prevailing  there.     Topics  suited  to  the  subject  191,  192 
Evils  which  would  follow  the  abolition  of  a  common  Government. 

Health,  &c. 192 

To  Gen.  La  Fayette.    Montpellier,  August  3  -  -  -  -      192 

Gen.  Bernard.  Anomalous  doctrines  of  S.  Carolina.  Public  senti- 
ment there,  and  among  the  Southern  people  generally.  Clouds  "  but 
local  and  transient."  European  affairs.  Poland.  Crisis  in  France. 
Confidence  felt  here  in  La  F..  &c.       -  192,  193 

To  Robert  Walsh.    Montpellier,  August  22  -  -  -  -  -       191 

Bishop  Madison's  high  merits.  A  remark  of  Robertson,  the  historian, 
about  the  time  of  Burgoyne's  surrender       ....      194 

To  Elisha  Smith.     September  1 1        ------       19-t 

Question  of  Bank  of  U.  S.    Opinion,  in  brief,  respecting  it      -  194,  195 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    Montpellier,  September  16     -  -  -  -       195 

C.'s  pamphlet.  A  defender  of  the  Constitution  and  Union  against 
false  doctrines  assailing  them.     Abandonment  in  Virginia  of  nullifi- 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xjx 


1831. —  Continued. 
cation,  &c.  "  But  it  still  flourishes  in  the  hot-bed  where  it  sprang 
up,"  &e.  Repels  the  suggestion  that,  though  denying  the  doctrine 
of  nullification,  he  concurs  in  that  of  secession.  "  Both  spring  from 
the  same  poisonous  root,"  &c,  &c.  Claim  to  effect  nullification 
through  the  State  judiciaries.    A  carriage  without  linchpins  195,  19G 

To  J.  Q.  Adams.   Montpellier,  September  23  1% 

A.'s  eulogy  on  the  life  and  character  of  Monroe  ...      jgc 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    Montpelier,  October  5  ....      197 

Pendleton's  observations  on  judicial  bill,  when  before  Senate  of  U.  S. 
None  touches  the  section  which  gives  to  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.  its 
controlling  jurisdiction  over  the  State  judiciaries.  P.'s  letters  to  R. 
H.  Lee.  Taylor's  authority  for  ultimate  jurisdiction  of  Supreme 
Court  of  U.  S.  over  boundary  between  U.  S.  and  the  States  -      197 

To  Professor  Tucker.    October  17    -  -  -  -  -  -      198 

Pendleton's  correspondence  with  R.  II.  Lee.   25th  section  of  judiciary 

act         ---------      198 

To Townsend,  (S.  C.)    Montpellier,  October  18        -  -  -      198 

Answers  to  questions.  Private.  Jefferson  not  the  author  of  Kentucky 
Resolutions  of  1799.  His  letter  to  W.  C.  Nicholas.  George  Nicholas 
was  the  elder  brother  of  TV.  C.  N.,  and  died  prior  to  Kentucky  Reso- 
lutions of  1799.  Jefferson's  sense  of  the  term  "nullify."  His  lan- 
guage in  the  Resolutions  of  1798,  and  letters  to  Giles  and  Cart- 
wright  ---------      199 

"Nullification  theory"  in  Richmond  Enquirer.     A  hope,  &c.  -  -      200 

To  Dr.  J.  TV.  Francis.    Montpellier,  November  7      -  -  -  -      200 

F.'s  address  to  the  Philolexican  Society  of  Columbia  College.    R.  R. 
Livingston,  Monroe,  and  negotiations  preceding  transfer  of  Louisi- 
ana to  U.  S.    Work  on  Louisiana  by  Marbois.    Real  cause  of  suc- 
cess.   Health,  &c.        -  -  -  -  -  -  200, 201 

To  Jared  Sparks.    Montpellier,  November  25  201 

Draught  sent  by  C.  Pinckney  to  Adams  and  printed  in  Journal  of  Con- 
vention, is  not,  and  why  not,  the  same  with  that  presented  by  P. 
to  Convention,  29  May,  1787  -  -  -  -  -  201,  202,  203 

P.'s  "  observations,"  &c,  printed  by  Childs.     Conjectures.    Delicacy 

of  the  topic,  &c.    Former  remarks  respecting  G.  Morris      -  -      203 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    December    -------      201 

Hayne's  speech.  Strange  errors.  Strictures  on  the  perseverance  of 
S.  Carolina  in  attempting  to  "  palm  on  Virginia  "  the  doctrine  that 
a  single  State  has  a  right  to  nullify  an  act  of  the  U.  S.         -  204,  205 

Inconsistencies  imputed  to  J.  M.  The  words  "  null,  void,  and  of  no 
effect,"  alleged  to  have  been  in  the  original  draught.  Effect  of 
their  excision.  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.,  and  the  parties  to  the  Con- 
stitution. Confused  application  of  the  phrase  "  last  resort,"  in  dis- 
regard of  the  distinction  taken  in  the  Virginia  Resolutions  them- 
selves, and  in  the  letter  to  Everett.    Same  distinction  within  the 


xx  STENTS     OF    VOL.     IV 

PAGE 

\iol.— Continued. 
several  Steles      -  -  -  -  -  -  -        20C    . 

Answer  to  complaint  of  subje..      _       -  -         ite,  Ac,  to  court 

composed  ot'  not  more  than  seven  i:  »  --li- 

ner-      stating 
tension  of  a  right  i:. 

everywhere,  of  a  Federal  law.  Ac.  and  I     - 
.ingent  veto  over  a  v  -  States. 

-  name  and  authority         -  -  -  -  - 

-  - 
| .  of  J.  when  he  wrote  the  '. 

-:  J.  M.    Yates's  remarks  m 
Debates.**  and  John  Taylor's  imputation        -  -  -  207,  2 

1  from  Federal,  that 
powers  to  bo  vested  in  the  new  Government  were  to  op^ 
an..  .rtethfOHt: 

-  only.     U.  5.  Government  a  novelty  a.: 
compound.  -  ...led  infer, 

word  "  national  '*  to  "  Chi        -  -  -  -  -        - 

Surr  -  -  •  arly 

and  sustained  opin. 

Federal:-  .nals.     Ve:o  on  bonus  bill  in  1817.    Do- 

mestic manufae  tores.     L-  :  -'*=. 

- 

tion.    F<.  .         - 

-    -  id- 

ing.  and  their  force  as  aiterin.: 

I  :e  ascendency  ascribed  to  uttatiom  t 
which  formed  Cons 

g  ,ve  validi:;  '.:■  it  -  -  -  • 

Decembe.  i  -  -  -  -  -  -       -    - 

;  er  -  -  -  -       -    - 

-------- 

... 

-  -  -  ■        - 

-  - 
ful  calamity  which  has  so  long;  afflicted  our  coon 
of  private  manumission.    Judicious  choice  of  a  new  abode  for  the 
emigrants.    Public  lands  "he  expenses  of  remo  f  I 

_     .    v.      .      -  -  -  -  ... 

- 


To  ]  istia.    MoatpeHier,  Febroar;  .... 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV  xxj 

PAGE. 

1832.—  Continued. 
Gerry's  service  in  Convention  of  1787.    An  active,  able,  and  interest- 
ing member      -  -  -  -  -  -  -  214,  215 

To  E.  D.  White,  M.  C.    Montpellier,  February  14     -  -  -  -      215 

Plan  for  the  total  abolition  of  Slavery  in  U.  S.    Error  in  ascribing  to 
J.  M.  the  opinion  that  Congress  can  constitutionally  appropriate 
public  funds  to  the  colonizing  plan.  Wished  their  powers  to  be  en- 
larged, &c.       --------      215 

To  A.  Robbins.    Montpellier,  March  21         -----      21G 

R.'s  speech  on  the  "  Protection  of  American  Industry."    Opposite 
views  of  others.    Eloquence  and  ability  in  the  discussion.    An  in- 
termediate ground  desirable   ------      216 

To  Henry  Clay.     March  22    -  -  -  -  -  -  -      216 

Apprehensions  from  the  discontent  produced  by  the  Tariff.    Threat- 
ened Southern  Convention.     "  Disastrous  consequences  of  disunion, 
obvious  to  all."     "  Aspirations  for  the  honors,  &c,  presented  to 
ambition  on  a  new  political  theatre,"  &c.     -  216,217 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    Montpellier,  May      ----..      217 

Attack  of  bilious  fever.     Refutation  of  charges  against  Jefferson. 
Suggestions.    President  Washington.    His  republican  formalities. 
Habit  in  J.,  "  as  in  others  of  great  genius,  of  expressing  in  strong 
and  round  terms  impressions  of  the  moment."    Remark  on  the  cor- 
respondences of  distinguished  public  men     -  217 
Tariff.   '•  Monstrous  alternative  presented  by  the  dominant  party  in  " 
S.  Carolina.      Intimation   as  to  "latent  views"  in  sympathizing 
States.    Blessings  under  the  Constitution.    The  Union  "  admitted 
to  be  the  only  guardian  of  the  peace,  liberty,  and  happiness  of  the 
people  of  the  States  comprising  it."    Idea  of  disunion  more  painful 
than  words  can  express           -           -           -           -           -           -218 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    Montpellier,  May  29  -  -  -  -  -  -      218 

Reflections  in  sickness  noted  by  pen  of  a  friend  :  Alleged  inequality 
in  the  operation  of  the  tariff,  the  manufacturing  States  bearing  a 
less  share  than  that  of  the  planting  States  of  duties  on  protected 
articles.    Remedy :  Duties  on  unprotected  articles  consumed  in  a 
greater  proportion  by  the  manufacturing  States,  e.  g.  tea.    Infer- 
ence from  argument  founded  on  the  repeal  of  the  duty  on  tea.  Jus- 
tice and  practicability  of  some  equalizing  arrangement.    Answers 
to  two  objections         -  -  -  -  -  -  219,  220 

To  Edward  Everett.    Montpellier,  May  30    -  -  -  -  -      220 

Doddridge's  speech  on  Congressional  privilege.    His  mistake  as  to 

authorship  of  judicial  act  of  1789.    Ellsworth.    Health       -  220,221 

To  Philip  Doddridge.    Montpellier,  June  6-  -  -  -  -221 

D.'s  speech.  Right  of  self-protection  inherent  in  legislative  bodies,  &c. 
Judicial  act  of  '89.  Ellsworth.  25th  section.  D.'s  controversy  with 
Cook.  Proposition  of  late  Virginia  Convention  for  occasional  re- 
apportionment of  representation        ...  -  221,  222 


XXli  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

VAGE. 

1832. — Continued. 
To  David  Iloffman.    June  13  -  -  -  -  -  -      223 

H.'s  lecture  in  the  University  of  Maryland.  Distinction  between  bench 
legislation  and  judicial  interpretation.    Colonial  codes       -  -      223 

To  Lawrence  T.  Dade,  and  others.    June  29  223 

Invitation  to  a  Fourth  of  July  celebration  in  Orange  county.    A  sen- 
timent --------  223,  224 

To  C.  E.  Haynes.    Montpellier,  August  27     -  -  -  -  -      224 

Proceedings  of  Virginia  in  '98-'99.    Letter  to  Everett.     Distinction 

between  two  classes  of  interposition.    Plural  term  "  Stales  "        224,  225 
Extreme  cases  of  oppression.    Geographical  argument  against  seces- 
sion.    A  view  deserving  further  developments  ...      225 
To  Benjamin  Romaine.   Montpellier,  November  8    -           -  -  -      226 

H.'s  pamphlet  on  State  sovereignty.    Devotion  to  Union.    Letter  in 
N.  A.  Review    --------      226 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    December  4  -  -  -  -  -  -  -      227 

Ordinance  of  S.  Carolina  Convention  and  report.    Infuriated  passions 
in  the  nullifying  party.    T.rs  proposed  compilation,  &c,  showing 
state  of  things  from  peace  of  1783  to  the  adoption  and  during  early 
period  of  the  Constitution.     Desirableness,  &c,  of  such  a  work      -      227 
To  N.  P.  Trist.    Montpellier,  December  23    -  -  -  -  -      228 

S.  C.  papers.  The  right  to  expel  a  State  from  the  Union  a  consequence 
of  the  secession  doctrine.   Natural  and  equal  obligations  and  rights 
of  parties  to  a  Government  founded  in  compact.   The  fallacy  which 
draws  a  different  conclusion  from  the  Virginia  Resolutions  of  '98. 
Confounding  a  single  party  with  the  parties.    Duty  of  a  single  party. 
Case  of  intolerable  abuse.     Personal  testimony  that  the  use  in  the 
Virginia  Resolutions  and  Report  of  the  plural  number  States  was  in- 
tentional as  it  is  uniform.  &c.    Kentucky  Resolutions.    Unfounded 
pretext  in  the  word  "respective"  for  perverting  the  Virginia  Reso- 
lutions -  -  -  -  ...  228, 229 

Inconsistency  of  the  nullifiers  in  making  "  the  name  of  Mr.  Jefferson 
the  pedestal  for  their  colossal  heresy,"  kc.    J.'s  letters  to  .Monroe 
and  Carrington.    High  time  for  public  opinion  to  put  down   the 
claim  to  secede  at  will.    The  President's  late  proclamation.    Cau- 
tion against  an  assumption,  by  the  Legislature  of  Virginia,  of  the 
high  character  of  mediators.    Personal  -  229 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    Montpellier,  December  27      -  -  -  -       230 

Correspondence  with  Judge  Roane.  Difference  in  opinion  from  him 
as  to  power  of  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.  in  relation  to  the  State  court. 
Reference  to  the  Federalist.  Pendleton's  opinion  in  favor  of  an  ap- 
peal from  the  Supreme  court  of  a  State  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  U. 
S.  Taylor's  argument  on  carriage  tax.  His  view  of  the  authority 
of  the  Federal  court.  Nullification  and  the  doctrine  which  makes 
the  State  courts  uucontrolable  by  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.  An 
omission  in  copy   of  letter   to  Roane   supplied.     Origin   of  the 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xxiii 

PAGE. 

1832. —  Continued. 
Constitution  as  explained  in  the  letter  to  E.Everett  and  in  the  Fed- 
eralist.   Invariable  use  of  the  plural  number  in  the  Virginia  Resolu- 
tions required  by  the  course  of  the  reasoning.    Bank  case.    Tariff. 
Charge  of  inconsistencies,  &c.  ....  230,  231 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    Montpellier,  December  28      -  -  -  -      231 

Letter  to  Roane.  Letter  to  E.  Everett,  and  a  previous  one,  very  sim- 
ilar, to  R.  Y.  Hayne.  His  heresy,  &c.  Opinions  as  to  roads  and 
canals, "  common  defence  and  general  welfare."  Tariff.  Perverse 
use  of  the  word  "  respective."  The  General  Assembly  of  Virginia 
in  '98  and  the  S.  Carolina  nullification  ...  231,  232 

To  Professor  Davis.*    Montpellier,    ---...      232 

D.'s  lectures  on  the  constitutionality  of  "  protective  duties,"  and  J. 
M.'s  letter  to  Cabell.  Defence  against  the  charge  of  extending 
power  of  Congress  to  occupations  of  tradesmen.  An  oversight  of 
D. 232,  233 

His  position  that  the  power  granted  to  Congress  to  impose  duties  lim- 
its them  to  the  sole  purpose  of  revenue,  and  that  no  power  to  im- 
pose duties  is  involved  in,  and  incident  to,  the  power  to  regulate 
commerce  with  foreign  nations.  Inconsistency  of  the  advocates  of 
this  construction  ------  233,  231 

Admission  of  protection  in  cases  only  which  are  incidental  to  revenue. 
Puzzling  cases  in  which  the  protective  effect  defeats,  &c,  the  rev- 
enue object.    A  consequence  of  that  doctrine  -  -  234,  235 

Wavering  concessions.  Countervailing  duties  against  foreign  restric- 
tions. 1.  As  to  the  condition  that  the  duties  be  not  continued  after 
they  are  found  to  be  ineffectual  to  produce  the  repeal  of  the  for- 
eign restrictions.  It  is  too  indefinite.  Its  suicidal  effect.  Exam- 
ples between  the  peace  of  17S3  and  the  establishment  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  U.  S.  -  -  -  -  -  -  235,  236 

2.  As  to  condition  that  the  duties  belaid  for  the  purpose  of  promoting 
commerce  :  Power  to  "  regulate  commerce  "  is  the  power  to  check 
or  extend  it.  The  general  effect  of  regulating  or  countervailing 
regulations  is  to  abridge  commerce,  &c.  Commerce  with  the  In- 
dians.   Foreign  coin.     The  term  "  promote  "  236 

3.  As  to  condition  that  the  regulation  must  operate  externally,  not  in- 
ternally: Its  impracticability.  General  effect  of  regulations  of  for- 
eign commerce  on  internal  pursuits,  e.  g.,  ship-buildiug.  Treaty 
stipulations  in  favor  of  French  silks  and  wines         -  236 

4.  As  to  condition,  that  the  duties  be  not  laid  for  the  purposes  of  pro- 
tecting or  encouraging  manufactures.  Supposed  case  of  a  foreign 
Government  giving  a  bounty  on  export  of  its  manufactures,  for  the 
purpose  of  under-selling,  &c,  vital  manufactures  of  another  coun- 
try.   Character  of  a  duty  balancing  the  bounty        ...      237 

*  John  A.  G.  Davi3,  Professor  of  Law  in  the  University  of  Virginia. 


Xxiv  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.     IV. 

PAGE. 

1532.—  Continued. 

Alleged  inequality  and  want  of  uniformity  and  of  limitation  in  case 

of  duties  laid  for  regulating  commerce.    Answer     -  -  -   7.238 

Confounding  the  abuse  and  the  usurpation  of  power;  the  taxing  and 
the  appropriating  power.    Considerations    -  -  -  238,  239 

Position,  that  ••  so  far  as  the  partial  operation  of  any  measure  of  the 
Federal  Government  may  affect  its  constitutionality,  it  is  in  regard 
to  States  and  not  individuals,  or  classes  of  indivM  i.c. 

Only  constitutional  provision  securing  equality  of  contribution 
among  the  States  is  in  the  case  of  direct  tax--.  Federal  compact 
formed  by  the  people  acting  as  separate  communities  in  their  sov- 
ereign and  highest  capacity.  Must  be  executed  within  extent  of  its 
granted  powers  according  to  forms  and  provisions  prescribed  in  it. 
without  reference  to  mode  of  formation.  Difference  between  the 
effect  of  a  dissolution  of  the  compact  and  that  of  a  dissolution  of 
the  social  compact  on  which  single  communities  are  founded 

.    \  240,  241 

Relation  of  the  people  to  their  Repr  in  Congress     -  -      241 

Assumption  that  Congress  has  been  denied  the  power  to  encourage 
manufactures.  Arc.  The  denial  is  ike  point  in  question.  Inconsist- 
encies of  opponents  of  a  protective  Tariff.  Practice  of  nations. 
Commercial  codes.    Treaty  of  1786  between  France  and  G.  B.      241.  242 

The  intention  of  those  who  adopted  the  Constitution:  guide  in  ex- 
pounding the  phrase.  "  the  power  to  regulate  commerce  with  for- 
eign nations."'  Considerations  against  the  inference  that  this  inten- 
tion was  adverse  to  the  power  of  encouraging  manufactures:  Prac- 
tice of  commercial  and  manufacturing  nations.  G.  Britain.  Under- 
standing of  Virginia     -  -  -  -  -  -  .    .    243 

Considerations  in  favor  of  the  opposite  inference :  Growth  of  manu- 
factures during  the  Revolutionary  war.  Inadequacy  of  commercial 
regulations  by  the  manufactur.   i  check  overwhelming  im- 

portations. Tench  Coxe.  Federal  Convention.  Manufactures  in 
Pennsylvania.  Debates  in  Convention  of  Massachusetts.  Webster's 
speech  at  Pittsburgh    ------  ->43.  244 

Lloyd's  Deb  Simons.    Lawrence.    Hartley  -  244.  245.  246 

Petition  from  manufacturers  to  Congress.  Continued  use  for  forty  years 
of  the  power  to  encourage  manufactures,  with  express  sanction  of 
the  executive  and  judicial  departments,  and  concurrence,  &c.  of 
the  State  authorities,  and  of  the  people  at  large,  with  a  limited  and 
recent  exception  ------  246,  247 

Composition  of  the  First  C     -      -      No  doubt  of  the  power  started. 
Propositions  by  member  from  Virginia  for  duties  on  coal  and  hemp, 
and  for  prohibition  of  beef.  <tc:  and  by  a  member  from  S.  Carolina 
for  duty  on  hemp.    Avowal  in  the  preamble  to  the  bill  as  it  p;i- 
into  a  law.    Washington.  President  of  the  Convention  and  P.  U   - 
&c.    A  fair  inference  from  an  untrue  fact.    Effect  of  all  this  con- 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xxv 

PAGE. 

1832. —  Continued. 
temporaneous  evidence  -----  247, 248 

Action  of  the  Executive  Department.  Extracts  from  Executive  mes- 
sages in  J.  M.'s  letters  to  Cabell.  Jefferson's  Reports  on  fisheries 
and  foreign  commerce,  and  his  correspondence  when  out  of  office. 
Probable  explanation  of  a  passage  in  his  letter  to  Giles.  Term  i;  in- 
definite"   248,249 

Action  of  the  Judiciary.  Effect  of  disregarding  all  their  authoritative 
interpretations  of  the  Constitution.  Preposterous  result.  Effect  of 
reading  a  code  of  the  antient  statutes  through  modern  meaning  of 
their  phraseology.  Deviations  from  original  import  of  some  of  the 
terms  of  the  Federal  Constitution       -----      249 

Answer  to  the  objection  that  the  true  character  of  a  political  system 

might  not  be  disclosed  within  a  period  of  30  or  40  years      -  -      249 

Importance  of  the  consideration  that  if  the  power  to  protect  domestic 
products  be  not  in  Congress,  it  is  extinguished  in  the  United  States 

249,  250 

Powers  of  Government,  in  our  political  system,  divided  between  the 

States  in  their  united  capacity  and  in  their  individual  capacities    -      250 

Plenary  character  of  the  powers  taken  together.  Violent  presump- 
tion that  the  encouragement  of  domestic  manufactures  is  a  Federal 
power.  Not  reserved  to  the  States  by  10th  Section  of  Art.  I  of 
Constitution.  Journal  of  Federal  Convention.  Why  the  States,  in- 
dividually, could  not  and  would  not  exercise  it  for  encouragement 
of  their  manufactures.    Result,  on  the  whole,  of  such  an  attempt 

250, 251 

Incapacity  of  the  States  separately  to  regulate  their  foreign  commerce. 
Previous  experience    -------      251 

Consequences  of  a  limited  impost  by  certain  States  having  peculiar 
advantages  for  foreign  commerce.  Taxes  levied  by  N.  York,  Penn- 
sylvania, Rhode  Island,  and  Virginia,  before  the  establishment  of 
Constitution  of  U.  S.,  on  the  consumption  of  their  neighbours.  Ex- 
asperating effect.  Foreseen  existence  of  the  present  inland  States. 
Kentucky,  Tennessee.  Embryo  States  on  north  side  of  the  Ohio, 
&c,  &c. 251,  252 

Mockery  of  providing  for  the  anticipated  States  a  permit  to  impose 
duties,  &c,  in  favor  of  manufactures.  Argument  from  extent  and 
mode  of  transportation,  even  now.  Notice  of  the  permission  grant- 
able  in  Sec.  10  of  Art.  I,  as  a  concurrent,  &c,  instead  of  being  a 
substituted  power        -------      252 

Why  encouragement  of  manufactures  permissible  to  the  States  by  du- 
ties on  foreign  commerce  cannot  be  regarded  as  incident  to  duties 
imposed  for  revenue.  General  conclusion  :  if  the  power  of  encour- 
aging domestic  manufactures  be  not  included  in  the  power  vested 
in  Congress,  U.  States  would  be  a  solitary  example  of  a  nation  dis- 
arming itself  of  the  power  altogether        -  -  -  252, 253 


xxvj  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1832. — Continued. 

Journal  of  Convention  of  1787.  Erroneous  inference  from  tbe  rejec- 
tion or  not  adopting  of  particular  propositions  embracing  power  to 
encourage  manufacture^.  Suppositions.  Course  of  proceedings  in 
deliberative  assemblies.  Crawford's  letter  to  Dickerson.  Surprising 
inferences.  Historical  keys  which  may  be  applied  to  text  of  Con- 
stitution, and  are  better  keys  than  unexplained  votes,  &c.  -  253,  254 

The  object  for  which  the  consent  of  Congress  was  grantable  to  the 
States  to  impose  duties,  &c.  Demonstration  from  the  early,  contin- 
ued, and  only  use  made  of  the  power  granted  by  Congress.  Refer- 
ences to  a  series  of  acts  of  Congress  passed  on  applications  under 
10th  Section  of  Article  I,  for  specified  purposes,  without  a  single  in- 
stance of  an  application  for  the  purpose  of  encouraging  State  man- 
ufactures. Improbability,  and  why,  that  any  such  will  ever  be  made, 
or,  if  made,  receive  the  assent  of  Congress.  Protest  of  N.  Jersey 
when  acceding  to  the  old  Federal  system.  Votes  of  N.  Hampshire, 
N.  Jersey,  and  Delaware  against  a  power  in  the  States  to  impose 
duties  even  with  the  consent,  and  subject  to  the  revision,  of  Con- 
gress    --------  254,  255 

Passage  cited  from  "Federalist"  No.  45,  as  excluding  the  power. 
Views  in  a  general  and  glancing  notice  of  a  subject  which  had  been 
previously  examined  in  detail.  Does  not  affect  question  of  a  pro- 
tective tariff,  derived  from  power  of  regulating  commerce  with  for- 
eign nations,  which  had  been  named  as  of  an  internal  character. 
Question  is,  whether  the  protective  power  be  embraced  by  the  reg- 
ulating power  -------  255,  256 

Fewness  of  enumerated  Federal  powers  when  compared  with  mass  of 
State  powers.  Classification  of  constitutional  powers  into  external 
and  internal  often  used  as  expressing  the  division  between  Federal 
and  State  power.  Exceptions.  Excises,  post-offices,  direct  taxes, 
questions  under  bankrupt  law,  and  under  State  laws  violating  con- 
tracts, &c,  &c.    Constitution  of  U.  S.  sui  generis      -  -  256,  257 

Answer  to  the  objection  that  if  Congress  can  impose  duties  to  protect 
American  industry  against  foreign  competition,  Congress  may  im- 
pose them  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  industry,  &c.,  of  the 
States  against  the  competition  of  each  other.  "  Federalist  "  No.  42. 
Coxe's  view,  &c.  -  -  -  -  -  -  -      257 

Personal  and  local  interests  pronounced  to  be  the  only  motives  for  a 
protective  tariff.  Answer.  Influence  of  public  motives.  Home 
market,  &c.  Prospective  addition  to  the  resources  of  the  country, 
and  a  diminution  of  its  dependence  on  foreign  supplies,  &c.  Fre- 
quent occurrence  of  wars,  and  the  effect  of  war,  in  raising  the  cost 
of  foreign  supplies  beyond  that  of  protecting,  in  time  of  peace,  do- 
mestic substitutes.  Admissions.  Annies,  fleets,  forts,  garrisons, 
armories,  arsenals,  &c.  Peculiar  sacrifices  to  anticipated  dangers 
of  war  and  invasion.    Reflections       -  -  -  -  258,259 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xxvii 

PAGE. 

1832. —  Continued. 

Personal  adherence  to  doctrine  stated  in  letters  to  Cabell,  i.  e.,  free 
trade  as  a  theoretic  rule,  and  subject  to  exceptions  only  not  incon- 
sistent with  the  principle  of  it.  "  Theories  are  the  offspring  of  the 
closet;  exceptions  to  them  the  lessons  of  experience "         -  -      259 

Dominant  opinions  in  Virginia  and  elsewhere.  Ferment  in  the  pop- 
ular mind.  Exaggerated  effects  ascribed  to  the  tariff.  Denounced 
as  a  "  system  of  plunder,"  &c.  Concealment  of  causes  reducing  the 
ability  of  the  planter  to  consume,  and  of  means,  besides  the  regis- 
tered exports,  of  the  people  of  the  North,  enabling  them  to  consume 
and  contribute  to  the  Treasury,  &c.   -  -  -  -  259,  2C0 

Real  causes  of  suffering  complained  of :  Fall  in  value  of  land  result- 
ing from  the  quantity  of  cheap  and  fertile  land  at  market  in  the 
West.  Fall  in  price  of  produce  of  land  resulting  from  increase  of 
produce  beyond  any  corresponding  increase  in  demand  for  it.  Il- 
lustrations          -  -  260,  261,  262 

Virginia,  though  not  the  loudest  complainant  of  the  actual  state  of 
things,  the  greatest  sufferer  from  it.  Greater  comparative  fall  in 
prices  of  her  lands,  and  of  her  great  staples,  flour  and  tobacco,  &c. 
Cotton  and  rice.  Glorious  agricultural  prospects  from  Western  at- 
traction of  population  and  rivalship  of  Western  exports.  Exporta- 
tion of  tobacco  from  N.  Orleans  in  a  particular  year.  Anticipations, 
&c.  Public  discontents  caused  more  by  the  inequality  than  by  the 
weight  of  the  pressure  of  the  tariff,  and  more  from  the  exaggerations 
of  both,  than  from  the  reality,  whatever  it  may  have  been,  of 
either  *  -  -  -  - 262 

Greater  productiveness  of  capital  in  the  Northern  States  than  in  Vir- 
ginia. Revenue  from  her  lands  and  slaves  never  equal  to  their 
money  value.  Sources  of  their  value  to  the  resident  proprietor. 
Condition  of  Virginia  planters  worse  now  than  that  of  merchants, 
&c,  &c,  and  why.  Error  in  ascribing  this  difference  to  the  tariff. 
Error  that  the  capitals  of  the  manufacturers  are  the  offspring  of  the 
tariff.  Insufficient,  but  to  a  certain  extent  available,  plea  of  the 
manufacturers,  that  their  present  investments  were  made  under 
the  patronage  and  implied  pledge  of  the  law,  &c.  Room  for 
equitable  compromises,  &c.     -----  263,  264 

Approaching  diminution  of  the  difference  of  the  employment  of  capi- 
tal and  labor  at  the  South  and  at  the  North  -  264 

First  appropriation  of  labor  in  our  country  is  to  procuring  from  the 
earth  food  and  other  articles  for  domestic  use;  the  second,  to  pro- 
curing, &c,  supplies  called  for  by  foreign  markets;  the  third,  the 
portion  not  being  needed  by  either,  will  be  applicable,  to  such  me- 
chanical and  manufacturing  employments  as  will  supply  at  home 
what  a  failure  of  demand  for  our  agricultural  products  will  disable 
us  from  purchasing  abroad      ------      264 

Anticipations  as  to  this  surplus  of  labor  beyond  the  first  and  second 


XXviii  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1832. — Continued. 
demand  for  it.    Attractions  of  Western,  &c,  lands.    European  im- 
provements in  agriculture.    Little  prospect  of  any  steady,  &c~.,  de- 
mand for  food  from  U.  S. 2G4,  265 

Consequence  from  the  glutted  state  of  the  foreign  market,  and  the 
constant  saturation  of  the  home  market  with  agricultural  products, 
that  the  increasing  surplus  of  labor  beyond  the  demands  for  agri- 
culture must  be  employed  on  the  other  branches  of  industry.  Ap- 
plication of  labor  to  the  arts,  &c,  in  thickly  settled  countries.  In 
U.  States,  notwithstanding  the  sparseness  of  the  population,  com- 
pared with  extent  of  vacant  soil,  a  growing  surplus  of  laborers  be 
yond  a  profitable  culture  of  it.  Must  be  a  manufacturing  as  well  as 
an  agricultural  country,  without  waiting  for  a  crowded  population, 
unless  some  unexpected  revolution,  &c,  should  occur         -  -      265 

Possible  contingent  substitution  for  a  foreign  commerce  of  articles 
respectively  furnished  by  the  North  and  the  South.  Present  state 
of  the  commerce  between  them  in  articles  of  the  North  not  protected 
by  the  tariff.  Calculations  and  anticipations.  Interior  more  import- 
ant than  exterior  commerce.  Its  general  advantages,  and  those 
peculiar  to  U.  S.    Scope  of  the  preceding  observations        -  265,  266 

1833.— [P.  2GG— 337.] 

To  Thomas  S.  Grimke.    January  10  -  -  -  -  -  -      266 

G.'s  letter  "to  the  people  of  S.  Carolina."    Its  protest  against  tho 
novel  doctrines  and  rash  counsels  of  the  ascendent  party.     Anima- 
ted discussion  in  the  Legislature  of  Virginia  -  -  '         266,  267 
To  N.  P.  Trist.    January  18   -            -            -            -            -  -  -      267 

Bank  transaction.  Reaction  in  S.  Carolina.  Predicted  astonishment 
of  posterity  at  the  present  infatuation.  Diversified  projects  of  the 
mediators  at  Richmond.  Secession  seems  to  have  more  adherents 
than  its  twin  heresy,  nullification.  Both  "  ought  to  be  buried  in 
ike  same  grave."  Oversight  as  to  a  great  principle.  Contingency 
of  an  irreconcilable  conflict  of  opinions  and  claims  of  rights  267,  268 
To  Edward  Livingston.    January  24  .....      268 

Assent  to  the  publication  of  a  letter.    Erratum  corrected.    A  bust. 

Health 268,  269 

To  Andrew  Stevenson.    February  4-  -  269 

Nullification  and  secession.  Virginia  proceedings  in  179S-'99.  Sev- 
enth and  third  Resolutions.  Obvious  distinction  between  the  rights 
of  the  States,  (plural,)  and  the  right  of  a  single  State,  overlooked. 
Character  of  question  raised  by  the  alien  and  sedition  laws.  Ques- 
tion, how  far  a  decision  of  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.  was  a  bar  to  the 
interposition  of  the  States       ------      269 

Secession  a  question  more  particularly  between  the  States  themselves 
as  parties  to  the  compact.  Fallacy  of  the  argument  derived  from 
the  sovereignty  of  the  parties.     Different  forms  of  presenting  the 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xxjx 

PAGE. 

1833. —  Continued. 
right  of  secession.    Late  attempts  to  shelter  the  heresy  under  the 
case  of  expatriation.    Essential  difference     -  2G9,  270 

Fallacious  arguments  drawn  from  the  difficulty,  under  Constitution 

of  U.  S.,  of  avoiding  collisions  .....      270 

Paper  on  nullification  [post,  395]  to  be  shown  to  Fatton  and  Rives. 
Suggestion  in  respect  to  legislative  Resolutions  declaring  the  essen- 
tial characteristics  of  Constitution  of  U.  S.  Restriction  and  modifi- 
cation of  the  tariff,  under  cautions  against  the  sudden  withdrawal 
of  domestic  supplies;  against  incurring  appearance  of  yielding  to 
threats;  against  opposing  any  constitutional  provisions  that  may  be 
necessary  and  proper  to  defeat  a  resistence  to  law,  and  against 
committing  Virginia  to  take  side  with  S.  Carolina,  or  any  other 
State,  in  resisting  the  laws  of  U.  S.,  &c,  &c.  -  -  -  270,  271,  272 

To  Andrew  Stevenson.    Montpellier,  February  10   -  -  -  -      272 

Explanations  as  to  a  former  remark,  and  as  to  object  in  giving  to  Pat- 
ton  and  Rives  a  sight  of  the  paper  on  Nullification.  Discouraging 
prospect  as  to  a  conciliatory  result  in  Congress.  A  trap  with  an 
anti-tariff  bait  for  Virginia.  Prediction,  that  if  S.  Carolina  secedes, 
she  will  do  so  on  the  avowed  grounds  of  her  respect  for  the  inter- 
position, and  a  reliance  on  the  future  co-operation,  of  Virginia.  In 
that  event,  and  a  continuance  of  the  Tariff  laws,  the  prospect  would 
be  a  rupture  of  the  Union,  a  Southern  Confederacy,  &c,  &c.  Awful 
consequences    -------  272,  273 

Commendation  of  Marshall's*  speech  in  H.  of  Delegates  -  -      273 

To  Rev.  R.  R.  Gnrley  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -      273 

Application  for  letter  introducing  Mr.  Brooks.    Preference  of  domes- 
tic over  foreign  pecuniary  contributions  to  A.  C.  Society    -  273,  274 
To  Rev.  R.  R.  Gurley.    Montpellier,  February  19     -            -            -  -      274 

Accepts  Presidency  of  A.  C.  Society.    Chief  Justice  Marshall  -  -      274 

To  Thomas  R.  Dew.    Montpellier,  February  23        -  -  -  -      274 

D.'s  pamphlets  on  the  "  restrictive  system  "  and  the  "  slave  question. 
Commendation  of  things  in  the  slavery  essay.  Dissent  from  man 
data,  and  from  D.'s  conclusion.  Expediency  of  gradual  emancip 
tion  combined  with  deportation.  Difficulties  and  wants.  Expens 
Increasing  voluntary  emancipations.  Gifts  and  legacies.  Legisla- 
tive grants  by  the  States.  Public  lands  held  in  trust  by  Congress. 
Facts  showing  the  facility  of  providing  naval  transportation  275,  276 

Adequate  asylums  in  Africa.  Flattering  prospect  there.  Auxiliary 
asylums  in  W.  I.  Islands.  Contingent  receptacle  in  territory  under 
control  of  U.  S.  -  -  -  -  -  .  -      276 

Consent  of  the  individuals  to  be  removed.  Cause,  and  prospective 
disappearance,  of  their  present  prejudices  against  removal  -  276,  277 

*  Thomas  Marshall  from  Fauquier  county.    Speech  delivered  7th  January,  1833.    Published  in 
Richmond  Enquirer,  5th  February. 


xxx  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1833. —  Continued. 

Difficulty  of  replacing  the  labor  withdrawn  by  removal  of  the  slaves. 
Answer  to  this  objection         ------      277 

Experiments  instituted  by  the  Colonization  Society     -  -  -      277 

Depressed  condition  of  Virginia.  Shivery.  Tariff  laws.  Effect  of 
rapid  settlement  of  Western  and  Southwestern  country.  Virginia 
before  tbo  Revolution,  and  during  the  period  of  the  Tariff  laws 
prior  to  the  latter  state  of  them.  The  great  and  adequate  cause  of 
the  depression.  Fall  in  value  of  lands,  and  in  that  of  their  slaple 
products  in  Virginia,  the  effect  of  redundancy,  in  the  market,  of 
both  land  and  its  products.  Cheapness  of  land  and  productiveness 
of  labor  in  West  and  S.  West.  Tobacco  seat  to  N.  (  Means.  Lim- 
ited market  for  the  great  staples  of  Virginia.  Prices  of  lands  and 
slaves.    Cotton  and  rice  -----  278,  279 

To  Judge  Buckner  Thruston.    March  1  279 

Cranch's  memoir  of  J.  Adams.  T.'s  Latin  epitaph.  Striking  difference 
between  Latin  and  English  idioms  in  the  collocation  of  words.  Dif- 
ficulty of  selecting  the  appropriate  word,  &c,  among  those  differ- 
ing in  shades  of  meaning,  &c.  Ludicrous  mistake  of  a  Frenchman. 
Lights  on  our  diplomatic  history  in  foreign  archives  -  279,  280 
To  John  Tyler 280 

T.'s  speech.  Consolidating  plan  of  Government  ascribed  to  E.  Ran- 
dolph, J.  M.  advocating  it.  Origin,  history,  and  features  of  the 
Resolutions  offered  by  E.  R.,  and  collation  of  them  with  the  plan 
adopted-  -------        281—286 

Structure  of  the  Government  proposed.  Powers  proposed  to  be  lodged 
in  the  Government  as  distributed  among  its  several  departments. 
Legislative  powers.    Negative  on  State  laws  -      2S1,  282,  283,  281 

Power  to  call  forth  the  force  of  the  Union  against  delinquent  mem- 
bers.   Executive  powers.    Judicial  powers  -  -  -  284,  285 

Trial  of  impeachments.  Questions  involving  "  the  national  peace  and 
harmony."  Understanding  of  the  Convention  that  R.'s  entire  reso- 
lutions were  a  mere  sketch,  &c,  &c.  -  -  -  -  2S5,  286 

General  conclusion.  The  term  "  national."  The  supposed  ground  of 
the  charge  against  R.'s  plan    -----  286,  287 

Why  the  term  was  used.    Its  propriety  ...  -      287 

Just  rule  for  interpreting  the  name  or  title.     "  A  bed  of  Procrustes  "      287 

R.'s  letter  giving  reasons  for  his  refusal  to  sign  Constitution.   George 
Mason's  refusal.    Gross  errors  of  Yates's  minutes  of  debates  in  the 
Convention.    Opposition,  and  its  motives,  of  the  dominant  party  in 
New  York  to  the  Convention.    Luther  Martin's  regret  for  the  tem- 
per of  his  report,  &c.  ------  288,  2S9 

To  W.  C.  Rives.    Montpellier,  March  12  289 

R.'s  speech  against  the  nullification  ordinance  of  S.  Carolina.  Novel 
and  nullifying  doctrine  that  the  States  have  never  parted  with  an 
atom  of  their  sovereignty;  and,  consequently,  that  the  Union  is  a 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  XXXJ 

PAGE 

1833. —  Continued. 
mere  league  or  partnership.    Our  political  system  a  nondescript. 
Absence  of  precedents.     Vattel         -----      289 

Preposterous  doctrine  that  the  States,  as  united,  are  in  no  respect  or 
degree  a  nation,  which  implies  sovereignty,  though  maintaining  all 
the  international  relations;  and  yet,  that  separately  they  are  com- 
pletely nations  and  sovereigns,  though  separately  they  cannot  main- 
tain any  of  the  international  relations  -  290 

Attempted  distinction  between  a  delegation  and  a  surrender  of  pow- 
er, merely  verbal  in  the  given  case.  Explicit  declaration  in  the 
Constitution  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  U. 
g. 290 

S.  Carolina  nullification.  More  formidable  question  of  secession.  The 
question,  whether  a  State,  by  resuming  the  sovereign  form  in  which 
it  entered  the  Union,  may  not  of  right  withdraw  from  it  at  will, 
"  is  a  simple  question,  whether  a  State,  more  than  an  individual, 
has  a  right  to  violate  its  engagements."  As  to  the  course  in 
the  event  of  misleading  effect  of  natural  and  laudable  feelings  of 
State  attachment,  and  unnatural .  feelings  against  brethren  of  other 
States.  Glance  at  the  event  of  an  actual  secession  without  the  con- 
sent of  the  co-States    -  -  -  -  -  -  -291 

Proceedings  of  Virginia  in  1798-'99.    State  of  things  then.    Reflec- 
tions.   Commendation  of  a  little  pamphlet    -  -  -  291,  292 
To  Baron  de  Humboldt.     March  12  -            -            -            -            -  -      292 

Introduction  of  David  Hoffman.    Former  prospect  of  another  visit 

from  the  Baron  to  U.  S.     Changes      -  -  -  -  -      292 

To  Daniel  Webster.    Montpellier,  March  15  -  -  -  -  -      293 

W.'s  late  speech  in  Senate  of  U.  S.  Nullification.  Secession  con- 
founds the  claim  to  secede  at  will  with  the  Revolutionary  right 
of  seceding  from  intolerable  oppression,  mixed  with  the  question 
whether  Constitution  of  U.  S.  was  formed  by  the  People  or  by  the 
States.  Undisputed  fact  that  it  was  made  by  the  People,  but  as 
embodied  into  the  several  States  who  were  parties  to  it,  and,  there- 
fore, made  by  the  States  in  their  highest  authoritative  capacity. 
Things  which  they  might  have  done,  but  did  not      -  293 

What  the  Constitution  is.  Organizes  a  Government;  invests  it  with 
specified  powers,  leaving  others  to  the  parties  to  the  Constitution; 
makes  the  Government  to  operate  directly  on  the  people;  invests 
it  with  needful  physical  powers;  proclaims  its  supremacy,  &c;  the 
powers  of  the  Government  being  exercised,  as  in  other  elective  and 
responsible  Governments,  under  control  of  its  constituents,  and 
subject  to  the  revolutionary  rights  of  the  people  in  extreme  cases 

293, 294 

Operation  of  Constitution  in  every  respect  the  same,  whether  its  au- 
thority be  derived  from  the  people,  collectively,  of  all  the  States  as 
one  community,  or  from  the  people  of  the  several  States  who  were 


xxxji  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    J  V . 

PAGE. 

1833. — Continued. 
the  parties  to  it.    Without  an  annulment  of  the  Constitution  itself, 
Its  supremacy  must  be  submitted  to  -----      294 

Only  distinctive  effect,  as  between  the  two  modes  of  forming  a  Con- 
stitution by  authority  of  the  people:  if  formed  by  them  as  unbodied 
into  separate  communities,  as  in  the  case  of  Constitution  of  U.  S.,  a 
dissolution  of  the  constitutional  compacl  would  replace  them  in  the 
condition  of  separate  communities;  and  if  the  Constitution  were 
formed  by  the  people  of  one  community,  acting  by  a  numerical  ma- 
jority, the  dissolution  of  the  compacl  would  reduce  them  to  a  state 
of  nature,  as  so  many  individual  persons.    [See  ante,  ]      -      294 

While  the  compact  remains  undissolved,  it  must  be  executed  accord- 
ing to  its  own  forms  and  provisions.  Compact,  the  principle  distin- 
guishing free  governments  from  governments  not  free.  "  A  revolt 
against  this  principle  leaves  no  choice  between  anarchy  and  des- 
potism » 294 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell.    Montpellier,  April  1  -  -  -  -  -      294 

As  to  suggestion  of  a  pamphlet  comprising  some  of  J.  M.'s  letters  on 
constitutional  questions.  Charges  of  inconsistency  against  him. 
One  of  them  renewed  in  Richmond  Whig.  Inference  from  erasure  of 
the  words  ••  are  null,  void,  and  of  no  effect,''  from  one  of  the  Reso- 
lutions of  1798-99,  words  synonymous  with  "  unconstitutional/'  If 
the  insertion  of  the  words  could  convict  him  of  being  a  nullifier, 
the  erasure  of  them  by  the  Legislature  was  the  strongest  of  protests 
against  the  doctrine.  The  vote  in  that  case  turns  pointedly  against 
S.  Carolina  the  authority  of  Virginia  -----      295 

Reason,  stated  on  the  authority  of  W.  B.  Giles,  of  the  erasure  of  the 
word  "  alone  "  after  "  States."  Why  it  had  been  inserted.  Com- 
mon notion  before  the  Revolution,  that  the  governmental  compact 
was  between  the  governors  and  the  governed.  Hayne  and  Web- 
ster. Judge  Roane  in  "Algernon  Sidney.''  Citation  from  letter 
5.  Example  of  the  one-sided.  Ac.  view.  &c,  of  the  relations  be- 
tween the  federal  and  State  governments.  Its  remarkable  errors. 
Jurisdiction  of  the  Federal  Judiciary  the  only  shield,  except  a  mir- 
acle, against  nullification,  anarchy,  and  convulsion  -  295,  296 

Plan  of  connecting  the  West  ami  the  Fast  by  a  route  through  Vir- 
ginia     ---------       297 

To  George  W.  Bassett.    Montpellier,  April  30  297 

Invitation  to  hiving  of  corner  stone  of  monument  to  memory  of  mother 
of  Washington  --------      297 

To  Benjamin  F.  Papoon.    Montpellier,  March  18     -       '   -  -  -      297 

Tendencies  of  the  rapid  growth  of  individual  States.  &&,  and  the  ab- 
sence, &C,  of  external  danger  to  impair  the  cement  of  their  Union. 
Danger,  now  added,  of  topics  engendering  feelings  of  sectional  Inu- 
tility. Countervailing  tendencies.  Other  dangers.  Self-confidence. 
Diminished  apprehensions  from  without.     Personal  aspirations  for 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xxxiii 

PAGE. 

1833. —  Continued. 
new  theatres,  multiplying  the  chances  of  elevation  in  the  lottery  of 
political  life.    Moral  causes  uniting  in  preserving  the  equilibrium 
contemplated  by  our  polity.    Suggestion  respecting  our  national 
emblem  ........      £9S 

South  Carolina  painting.    Age,  &c.        .....      299 

To  Henry  Clay.    June  .......      299 

Retention  of  the  land  bill  by  the  President.  Intention  of  the  Consti- 
tution as  to  the  action  of  the  President  and  Congress  respecting 
bills.  Responsibility  for  abuse  on  either  side.  Nothing  short  of 
President's  signature,  or  a  lapse  of  ten  days  without  a  return  of  his 
objections,  or  an  overruling  of  his  objections  by  two-thirds  of  each 
House,  can  give  validity  to  a  bill.    Inquiries,  &c.    -  -  299,  300 

Considerations  favoring  the  prospect  of  salutary  results  from  the  com- 
promising tariff  ---....      3Q0 

Prospect  of  employment  in  manufactures  of  tobacco  laborers  in  Vir- 
ginia. Contingency  of  war  in  Europe.  Its  effect  here.  Theory  of 
Free  Trade       --......      3qj 

Efforts  to  alarm  the  South  by  misrepresentations  of  Northern  feeling. 
Madness  in  the  South  to  look  for  greater  safety  in  disunion.  The 
fire  and  the  frying-pan.  Insidious  revival  of  project  of  a  Southern 
Convention.     Question  of  C."s  return  to  Congress     -  301 

To  P.  R.  Fendall.    Montpellier,  June  12        .....      392 

American  Colonization  Society.     Donation       ....      302 
To  Benjamin  Waterhouse.    Montpelier,  June  21      -  -  -      302 

A  literary  present.    Health.    Pocahontas         ....      302 
To  Professor  Tucker.    July  6  -----  .      303 

Letters  from  Jefferson.  Delicate  personalities.  Gem.  A  former  let- 
ter. Treaties  by  States.  J.  speaks  of  the  Constitution  of  U.  S.  as 
forming  "  us  into  one  State  for  certain  objects,"  &c,  <&c.      -  -      303 

To  W.  C.  Rives.    Montpellier,  August  2        -  -  -  -  -      303 

Tyler's  pamphlet.  Supposed  omission  of  passage  in  the  newspaper 
edition  of  his  speech.    '•Mutius.''    Dr.  Mason  -  -  303,304 

To  Gales  and  Seaton.    August  5        -----  .      304 

Lloyd's  "  Debates  "  very  defective,  &c.  Fenno.  Freneau.  Carey's 
Museum.  Callender.  Carpenter.  Brown.  Dunlap.  Duane.  Never 
wrote  a  speech  beforehand.   Limited  correction  of  reporter's  notes, 

&c 304,  305 

To  Thomas  S.  Grimke.    August  10    -  -  -  -  -  .      305 

G.'s  "  Oration  on  the  4th  of  July,"  and  "  Letter  on  Temperance." 
General  commendation.  A  few  errors  of  fact.    Autographs.    "  Pro- 
crastination."   Anodyne  adopted  by  Congress.    A  hope    -  305,  306 
To  Major  Henry  Lee.    August  14-            -            -            -            -  .      306 

Letter  under  cover  to  P.  A.  Jay.  Misleading  misprint.  G.  Joy.  L.'s 
"  Observations  on  the  writings  of  Mr.  Jefferson."  General  Henry 
Lee  among  the  harshest  censors  of  the  policy,  &c.,  during  the  first 


xxxiv  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

TAGE. 

1833. —  Continued. 
term  of  Washington's  administration.    His  patronage  of  the  gazette 
of  Frenean,  his  former  college  mate,  &o.      -  30G 

To  Peter  Augustus  Jay.    Montpelier,  August  14     -  307 

Jefferson.    Joy.    Misprint         ------      307 

To  Edward  Everett.    August  22 307 

E.'s  address  at  Worcester.    Suggestion  respecting  our  anniversary  or- 
ators     ---------      307 

To  James  B.  Longacre.     Augusl  27  -  -  -  -  -  -      307 

Promised  biographical  sketch  by  a  friend.    L.'s  visit  -  -  307,  308 

To  W.  A.  Duer.    September  -  -----      308 

D.'s  work  on  the  constitutional  jurisprudence  of  U.  S.  Position  in 
University  of  Virginia.  Law  school.  Text  book.  Opinions.  Ac, 
of  the  Professor  of  Law.    Papers  of  D.'s  father  in  Childs's  Graa 

308,  309 

To  W.  C.  Pives.     October  21 309 

Physical  infirmities,  Ac.    A  sketch  enclosed.    Charges  of  "  Mutius." 
Yates's  notes  of  debates  crude  and  desultory.    His  political  bias. 
Fallacy  of  inferences  from  votes  in  the  journal,  Ac.    Incredible 
charge  that  J.  M.  had  said  that  the  States,  in  the  time  of  the  Con- 
federation, had  never  possessed  the  essential  rights  of  sovereignly, 
&c,  &c.     What  he  might  have  said,  and  was  true.     The  charge  of 
having  said  that  the  States  were  only  great  political  corporations,  &c. 
The  theory  of  the  old  Confederation  and  the  practice.    Effect  of  the 
practical  inefficacy.    Charge  of  having  declared  that  the  States 
ought  to  be  placed  under  control  of  General  Government,  at  Least 
as  much  as  they  formerly  were  under  K.  and  Parliament  of  G.  B.  -       310 
British  power  over  the  Colonies  as  admitted  by  them.    Same  power 
vested  in  the  Federal  Government.     Exceptions  and  differences. 
General  result  --------      312 

Idea  of  a  negative  on  State  laws  ....  312,  313 

Radical  cure  for  a  radical  defect  of  the  old  Confederation  necessary  and 
expected.    Proposition  of  the  Deputies  of  Virginia  for  a  power  in 
Congress  to  repeal  unconstitutional  and  interfering  laws  of  States. 
Proposed  negative  on  them.   Mode,  finally  preferred,  of  controlling 
legislation  of  the  States.    Taylor's  opinion   -  -  -  -      313 

Absurdity  imputed   to  J.  M.     His  expression   of  attachment  to  the 
rights  of  the  States.  Agreements  and  differences  of  opinion  between 
him  and  Hamilton         ------  313.314 

Jefferson's  opinion  of  the  "Federalist"  ...         314,315 

Report  of  1799  and  letter  to  Everett     -----      315 

Extracts  from  the  report  and  from  the  letter     -  -  -  315,  316,  317 

Ultimate  decision  referred  t>>  confined  to  cases  within  the  judicial  scope 
of  the  Government.  Omissions,  Ac  of  "  Mutius."  Ulterior  resort 
to  the  authority  paramount  to  the  Constitution.  Those  different  re- 
sorts not  incompatible  ....  -  zi~ ,  318,  319 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xxxv- 

PAGE. 

1833. —  Continued. 

Distinction  between  the  right  of  a  single  State,  &c,  and  the  rights  of 
the  States  as  parties,  &o.  ------      319 

People  of  the  several  States  one  people  for  certain  purposes    -  319,  320 

Recognition,  by  all  parties,  of  the  oneness,  the  sovereignty,  and  the 
nationality,  of  the  people  of  U.  S.,  within  the  prescribed  limits.  By 
Jefferson.     His  letters  to  Tracy,  Hopkinson.  Wythe,  and  J.  M.       320,  321 

Strange  appearance  of  questioning  the  nationality  of  the  States  in  their 
united  character.     Their  attributes  in  that  character  -  -      321 

Outrageous  imputations  -  -  -  -  -  -  -      321 

General  uniformity  of  J.  M.'s  opinions  on  great  constitutional  ques- 
tions.   Case  of  the  Bank.    Letter  to  Ingersoll  -  -  -      321 

Consistency  of  opinions  on  the  caption  "  We,  the  people,"  the  phrase 
"  common  defence  and  general  welfare,"  "  roads  and  canals,''" "  alien 
and  sedition  laws."    Support  of  amendments,  &c.    -  -  -      322 

Course  concerning  constitutionality  of  a  tariff  for  encouraging  domes- 
tic manufactures,  and  paramount  authority  of  decisions  of  Supreme 
Court  of  U.  S.  in  cases  within  its  constitutional  jurisdiction  over 
State  decisions  ------  322,  323 

Suggestions  as  to  "  Mutius  -------      323 

To  Francis  Page.    Montpellier,  November  7  -  323 

Petition  in  favor  of  Gen.  Nelson's  heirs.    His  high  character,  patriot- 
ism, &c.    Gov.  Page    ------  323,  324 

To  Major  Henry  Lee.    Montpellier,  November  26     -  -  -  -      324 

Correspondence  with  General  Henry  Lee.    Health      -  -  324,  325 

To  G.  W.  Featherstonhaugh.    Montpellier,  December  8       -  -  -      32.5 

Mineral  resources  of  Virginia.     Geological  survey       -  -  -      325 

To  Frederic  Peyster  --------      325 

Collections  of  N.  Y.  Historical  Society.    Importance  of  such  institu- 
tions to  a  future  history  of  our  country         ...            -      325 
To o2G 

New  doctrine  of  the  greater  oppressiveness  of  a  majority  Government. 
Hostile  to  republicanism.  Former  opinion  that  a  republican  Gov- 
ernment was,  in  its  nature,  limited  to  a  small  sphere.  History  of 
Republics.  Introduction  of  the  representative  principle.  G.  B.  and 
her  Colonial  offsprings.  Combination  in  the  political  system  of  U. 
S.  of  a  federal  with  a  republican  organization  -  -  326,  327 

Its  effect  in  exploding  the  old  error,  and  in  enlarging  the  practicable 

sphere  of  popular  Governments.    Montesquieu's  observation  -      327 

Anti-republicanism  of  the  new  heresy.  Answer  of  experience  to  ob- 
jections, &c,  founded  on  the  extent  of  the  Union.  Territories.  Ef- 
fect of  canals,  steamboats,  turnpikes,  railroads,  in  the  virtual  ap- 
propinquation  of  the  most  distant  parts  of  the  Union  -  327,  328 

Scope  for  abuses  of  power  of  majority  governments  within  the  indi- 
vidual States.  Creditors  and  debtors.  Distribution  of  taxes.  Con- 
flicting local  interests,  &c.    Former  abuses,  &c,  by  majorities.    Ex- 


XXXvi  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1833. —  Continued. 
pectations  from  the  Constitution  of  U.  S.        -  -  -  328,  329 

Alleged  abuses  under  the  majority  Government  of  the  U.  S.  less  than 
under  the  previous  administrations  of  the  State  governments.  Say- 
ing that  all  government  is  an  evil.  Necessity  of  any  government  a 
misfortune.  Problem  which  form  is  least  imperfect.  General  ques- 
tion must  be  between  a  republican  government,  in  which  the  ma- 
jority rule  the  minority,  and  a  government  in  which  a  less  or  the 
least  number  rule  the  majority.  Final  question,  what  is  Lhe  best 
structure  of  the  republican  form  ?  Import  of  a  wholesale  denuncia- 
tion of  majority  governments  -  ..... 

Discordant  interests  within  particular  States.  Application  of  agricul- 
tural labor.  Different  products  for  market  in  different  districts  of 
Virginia.  Roads  and  water  communications.  Distinctions  of  in- 
terest and  of  policy  generated  by  the  existence  of  slavery.  E 
ern  and  Western  districts  of  Virginia.  Her  Convention  in  1829-'30. 
Debates  of  her  Legislature  in  1830-'31  -  -  -  329,330 

The  Tariff.  Main  division  of  the  mass  of  the  people  in  all  countries 
into  the  class  raising  food  and  raw  materials,  and  the  class  pro- 
viding clothing  and  the  other  necessaries  and  conveniences  of  life-      330 

Relative  numerical  strength  of  those  classes  in  the  Old  World.  Diffi- 
culty of  regulating  their  relative  interests.     Taxes.     Protection 

330,  331 

In  G.  B.  the  advocates  of  the  protective  policy  belong  to  the  landed 

interest;  in  U.  S.,  to  the  manufacturing  interest,  &c.  -  -      331 

Question  as  to  danger  within  the  several  States  from  abuses  of  the 
majority  power  engendered  by  a  division  of  the  community  into 
agricultural  and  manufacturing  interests        ....      331 

Certainty  that  Virginia  must  soon  become  manufacturing  as  well  as 
agricultural ,  and  why  -  .....  331,332 

People  will  be  formed  into  the  same  great  classes,  agricultural  and 
manufacturing,  in  Virginia  as  elsewhere.  Cases  of  the  Tariff,  &c, 
must  be  decided  by  the  republican  rule  of  majorities;  consequence, 
if  majority  governments,  as  such,  be  the  worst  of  governments. 
Choice  left  for  persons  holding  this  opinion  between  aristocracy, 
oligarchy,  monarchy,  Utopia,  &c.     Anticipations     ...      332 

Consoling  anticipation  as  to  conflicts  of  interests  between  the  agricul- 
tural and  manufacturing  States  -  .  -  -  -  332,  333 

As  to  objection,  that  the  majority  as  formed  by  the  Constitution  may 
be  a  minority  when  compared  with  the  popular  majority :  Causes 
producing  this  departure  from  the  rule  of  equality.  Combination  of 
property  with  population  in  apportioning  representation,  &.c.  Con- 
federacies. Compound  system  of  U.  S.  Possible  abuses.  Remedy, 
the  amendment  of  the  Constitution,  or,  in  given  cases,  its  subver- 
sion. Duty  of  acquiescence  in  the  constitutional  majority,  while 
the  Constitution  exists.     The  power  created  by  it  is,  while  it  is  in 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xxxvii 

PAGE 

1833. —  Continued. 
force,  the  legitimate  power.    A  favorable  consideration.    Result 

of  the  whole 333,  334 

To  "  A  Friend  of  the  Union  and  State  Rights "        -  -  -  -      334 

Proceedings  of  Virginia  in  1798-'99  do  not  countenance  the  doctrine 
that  a  State  may  at  will  secede  from  its  constitutional  compact  with 
the  other  States.  State  of  the  question,  and  positions,  &c,  on  the 
other  side  at  that  time  -  334,  33c 

Case  of  the  alien  and  sedition  laws  a  case  between  the  Government 
of  the  U.  S.  and  the  constituent  body.  Case  of  a  claim  in  a  State 
to  secede  from  its  union  with  the  others,  a  question  among  the 
States  themselves  as  parties  to  the  compact  -  -  -  33? 

Position  taken  against  the  appeal  of  Virginia  to  the  constituent  body 
against  assumptions  of  power  by  the  Government  of  U.  S.  Right 
of  the  States  to  interpose  a  legislative  declaration  on  a  constitutional 
point  denied.  Object  of  Virginia  to  vindicate  legislative  declara- 
tions of  opinion  ;  to  designate  the  several  constitutional  modes  of 
interposition  by  the  States.  &c;  and  to  establish  their  ultimate  au- 
thority as  parties  to,  and  creators  of,  the  Constitution,  to  interpose 
against  the  decisions  of  the  judicial  as  well  as  other  branches,  &c.  -      335 

Misconstruction  of  the  term  "respective"  used  in  the  third  resolu- 
tion. Use  of  the  plural  number  "  States."  Language  of  the  closing 
resolution.  Course  of  reasoning  in  the  Report  on  the  Resolutions. 
Non  sequiturs.  Characteristic  distinction  between  free  govern- 
ments and  governments  not  free.  Compact.  Equal  rights  of  par- 
ties to  it.  Inference  from  the  doctrine.  Attempted  analogy  be- 
tween State  secession  and  individual  expatriation.  Difference.  Jef- 
ferson   ---  .....      336 

1834.— [P.  337—372.] 

To  Thomas  S.  Grimke.   Montpellier,  January  6        -  -  -  -      337 

Autographs.  Dr.  Franklin's  proposition  in  favor  of  a  religious  ser- 
vice in  the  Federal  Convention.  Quaker  usage.  Erroneous  com- 
munication in  National  Intelligencer.  C.  Pinckney's  draught  of  a 
Constitution  for  U.  S.  Not  the  same  with  that  laid  before  the  Con- 
vention. Embarrassing  curiosity  excited  by  the  conformity,  &c, 
on  certain  points,  &c,  of  the  draught  in  the  Journal  with  the  adopted 
Constitution.  Delicacy  of  the  subject.  Origin,  object,  See.,  of  prop- 
ositions of  E.  Randolph.  No  provision  in  P.;s  draught  printed  in 
the  Journal  for  electing  President  of  U.  S.    -  -  -  337,  338,  339 

To  W.  C.  Rives.   Montpellier,  February  15  -  -  -  -  -      339 

R.'s  speech  on  the  "  removal  of  the  deposits."    Different  view  of  the 

lights  in  which  the  reasoning  presents  some  of  the  questions  339,  340 

To  Dr.  B.  Waterhouse.    Montpellier,  March  1  340 

W.'s  "  public  lecture."  Temperance  societies.  "  History  of  the  Hart- 
ford Convention."    Possible  notice  of  it  from  the  "  masterly  pen  " 


XXXviii  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1 834. — Continued. 
of  J.  Q.Adams.    Age,  &c.      ------      340 

To  Major  Henry  Lee.    Montpellier,  March  3  ...  -      340 

A  statement  of  Jefferson.    Why  J.  M.  declined  an  Executive  appoint- 
ment under  Washington,  and  accepted  it  under  Jefferson.    Corres- 
pondence with  (Jen.  II.  Lee     -----  340,341 
To  Rev.  Win.  Cogswell.    Montpellier,  March  10       -  341 

Constitution  of  U.  S.  the  offspring,  not  of  a  single  brain,  but  of  many 
heads  and  many  hands.     Minerva.     Classification  in  library  of  Vir- 
ginia   University.     Sermon,   &c.     Veteran   error  of  entwining  the 
civil  and  ecclesiastical  polity  -  ...  -  341,342 

To  John  M.  Patton.     March  24  ------       342 

P.'s  speech  on  the '•  Virginia  Resolutions,"  [made  in  the   II.  of  R., 
March  3,  1834.    Gales  &  Seaton's  Register  of  Debates  in  Congri 
X,  2846 — 2868.]    Reasons  against  the  establishment  of  a  share jp 
the  power,  as  claimed  for  the  Senate,  in  removals  from  office        342,  343 
Elastic  and  Protean  character  of  the  legislative  power.    The  law*  de- 
claring a  large  class  of  offices  vacant  at  the  end  of  every  lour  years. 
Light  in  which  the  larger  States  would  regard  any  innovation  in- 
creasing the  weight  of  the  Senate    -----       343 

Cautions  in  applying  remedies  to  faults  in  Constitution  of  U.  S.        343,  344 

To  the  Committee  of  Fourth  of  July  Democratic  Festival,  Philadelphia    -      344 

Invitation  to  a  proposed  celebration.     Toast.    Jefferson         -  -      344 

To  John  P.  Kennedy.    July  7  ------      344 

K.'s  Life  of  Wirt.    Praise  of  W.  and  of  K.'s  work         -  -  344,  345 

To  J.  Q.  Adams.    Montpellier,  July  30  345 

A.'s  intended  speech  on  the  •'  removal  of  the  deposits."  "  Able  and 
impressive  views,"  &c.  Incident  in  the  career  of  La  Fayette.  Joy's 
letters  relating  to  the  "  Orders  in  Council,"  valuable,  &c.   Personal 

345,  346 
To  Edward  Livingston.    Montpellier,  August  2        -  -  346 

Letter  to  Major  Lee.  E.  L.'s  outline  of  the  condition  of  France.  Prob- 
able influence,  &c,  of  the  death  of  La  Fayette.  Late  results  in  Por- 
tugal and  Spain.  General  hope,  &c.  Party  spirit  in  U.  S.,  and  in 
Virginia  particularly,  &c.    Crops      -  346,  347 

To  Linn  Banks,  and  others,  Committee.    Montpellier,  August  18   -  -      348 

Invitation  to  a  public  dinner  to  J.  M.  Patton.  Resolutions  of  Vir- 
ginia 1798,  and  Report  in  1799.  ConGdence  in  our  system  of  Gov- 
ernment, &c.    --------      348 

To  Mr. 349 

Sense  and  degree  in  which  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.  is  a  constitutional 
resort  in  deciding  questions  of  jurisdiction  between  U.  S.  and  the 

*  "  An  act  to  limit  tho  term  of  office  of  certain  officers  thcreiu  named,  and  for  other  purposes," 
approved  May  15, 1820.  Ill  Stat.  L.,  5S2.  See  letter  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  December  10, 1S20.  Ante, 
iii,  196. 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  XXXIX 

PACE. 

1834. —  Continued. 
individual  States.  Consequence  from  the  relations  of  the  legislative, 
executive,  and  judicial  departments  of  Q.  B.  to  each  other  and  to 
the  Constitution.  Mutual  duty  of  their  respective  functionaries.  Why 

the  judicial  department  most  engages  the  respect  and  reliance  of 
the  public,  as  the  surest  expositor  of  the  Constitution,  Sec.  -  349,  350 

Power  of  tue  President  to  appoint  Public  Ministers  and  Consuls  di  the 

RECESS  of  the  Senate      -------      350 

Why  the  place  of  a  foreign  Minister  or  Consul  is  not  an  office  in  the 

constitutional  sense  of  the  term  -----      350 

To  be  viewed  as  is  a  place  created  by  the  law  of  nations.  Presuppo- 
sition of  the  Constitution  in  providing  for  the  appointment  of  such 
functionaries    -------  350,  351 

Question  to  be  decided.  Power  of  President  "  to  fill  up  all  vacancies 
that  may  happen  during  the  recess  of  the  Senate."  Extent  of  the 
power  in  municipal  cases.  The  literal  rule.  But  the  power  has 
been  understood  to  extend,  in  cases  of  necessity  or  urgency,  to  va- 
cancies happening  to  exist  in  the  recess  of  the  Senate,  though  not 
coming  into  existence  in  the  recess.  Examples.  Wirt's  official  con- 
struction --------      351 

Reasons  a  fortiori  for  considering  the  sole  power  of  the  President  as 

applicable  to  appointment  of  foreign  functionaries  -  -  351,  352 

Imputation  from  a  contrary  construction,  on  the  framers  and  ratifiers 
of  the  Constitution.  Supposed  cases.  The  construction  favorable 
to  the  power  not  more  liberal  than  would  be  applied  to  a  remedial 
statute.  A  rejection  of  it  would  altogether  exclude  this  function, 
in  the  cases  put,  from  our  political  system.  Objection  to  regarding 
the  constitutional  power  of  appointing  the  highest  functionaries  em- 
ployed in  foreign  missions  as  incidental,  in  any  case,  to  a  subordi- 
nate power       --------      352 

Missions  to  foreign  courts  to  which  there  had,  and  to  which  there  had 
not,  before  been  appointments.  Stations  at  foreign  courts  and 
special  negotiations.  Appointment  to  a  foreign  court  at  one  time, 
and  to  a  municipal  office  always  requiring  it.  The  distinction  made 
almost  ludicrous  by  the  question  for  what  length  of  time  the  cir- 
cumstance of  the  former  appointment  is  to  have  the  effect  assigned 
to  it,  or  the  power  of  the  President.   Illustrations,  &o.    Practice  of 

the  Government  of  U.S. 352,353 

To  N.  P.  Trist.    Montpellier,  August  25        -  -  -  -  -      354 

Copy  of  extract  of  a  letter  of  Jefferson  relating  to  Resolutions  of 
1798-'99.  Misdating.  Letter  of  W.  C.  Nicholas.  Anti-nullifying 
language  of  letters  from  Monroe.  Taylor's  argument  ou  the  car- 
riage tax.  His  contrariant  opinions  on  the  judicial  supremacy  of 
U.  S.  Journal  of  II.  D.  in  1798-99.  Vote  of  the  minority  crush- 
ing the  inference  that  the  Resolutions  must  have  intended  to  claim 
for  the  State  a  nullifying  interposition  -  354 


Xl  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1834. — Continued. 
To  Edward  Coles.    Montpellicr,  August  29  -  -  -      354 

Avoidance  of  political  controversy.  Difference  in  personal  relation 
to  the  Resolutions  of  98-*!)!),  and  to  present  constitutional  questions. 
Ago  and  infirmities.  Questionable  claims  of  the  Senate.  Admis- 
sion by  some  of  President  Jackson's  Leading  opponents,  that  the  re- 
moval of  the  deposits  was  not  a  usurpation,  but  an  abuse  only,  of 
power.  Unconstitutional  denial  of  a  legislative  power  over  the 
public  money.  No  denial  to  the  Legislature  of  an  exclusive,  <tc, 
appropriating  power,  or  of  a  claim  of  an  appropriating  power  for 
the  Executive.     Distinction  between  custody  and  appropriation 

355,  35G 

President's  disavowal  of  the  obnoxious  meaning  put  on  some  of  his 
acts.  Condemnation,  formerly  expressed,  of  the  proclamation  "in 
the  sense  which  it  bore,  but  which,  it  appeared,  had  been  dis- 
claimed." Abstraction  from  the  polemic  scene.  Private  conversa- 
tions.   Answers  to  dinner  invitations  ....      356 

Odious  principle  that  offices  and  emoluments  are  the  spoils  of  vic- 
tory, &c.  lias  seen  no  avowal  of  it  by  the  President.  The  first 
opeu  proclaimer  of  it  now  the  most  vehement  in  denouncing  the 
practice.  Degrading  effect,  &c.  The  odium  an  antidote  to  the  poi- 
son of  the  example,  &c.  -----  35G,  357 

President's  popularity  sinking  under  the  unpopularity  of  his  doc- 
trines.    Evidences        -------       357 

Evident  progress  of  nullification,  either  in  its  original  shape,  or  in 
disguises  assumed.  Powder  and  a  match  for  blowing  up  the  Consti- 
tution and  Union  at  pleasure.  Increasing  minorities  in  most  of  the 
Southern  States.  Contrast  between  the  figure  which  the  anarchical 
principle  now  makes  in  Virginia,  with  the  scouting  reception  given 
to  it  a  short  time  ago   -------      357 

The  offspring  of  discontents  in  S.  Carolina.  Improbability  that  it  will 
ever  approach  success  in  a  majority  of  the  States.  Visible  suscep- 
tibility of  the  contagion  in  the  Southern  States.  Danger  that  sym- 
pathies arising  from  known  causes,  and  the  inculcated  impression 
of  a  permanent  incompatibility  of  interests  between  the  South  and 
the  North,  "  may  put  it  in  the  power  of  popular  leaders  aspiring  to 
the  highest  stations,  and  despairing  of  success  on  the  Federal  thea- 
tre, to  unite  the  South  on  some  critical  occasion,  in  a  course  that 
will  end  in  creating  a  new  theatre  of  great  though  inferior  extent." 
The  steps  in  this  course  :  Nullification;  then  secession;  then  a  fare- 
well separation.  Lately,  this  course  near  being  exemplified.  Dan- 
ger of  its  recurrence,  &c.  Countervailing  calculations.  "  Local 
prejudices  and  ambitious  leaders."     The  China  vase.     Health.  &c. 

357,  358,  359 
To  George  Joy.    Montpellier,  September  9  -  -  -  -  -      359 

Incident  in  life  of  La  Fayette  communicated  to  J.  Q.  Adams.    Sir 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xll 

TAGE. 

1834. —  Continued. 
James  Graham.    Orders  in  Council  mentioned  by  Joy;  the  ground 
of  the  embargo.    Historical  fact.     Causes  of  the  failure  of  the  em- 
bargo.   The  Marblehead  Beamen       ...  -  359^  300 

Agency  of  the  Orders  in  Council  in  relation  to  the  declaration  of 
war 360 

Question  put  to  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  during  the  negotia- 
tion at  Ghent,  concerning  the  "  war  taxes"  -  -  -  3C0,  3C1 

J.'s  anticipation  of  the  future  course  of  G.  B.  as  to  impressment,  &c. 
The  former  negotiation  with  the  Dutch.  Possible  effect  of  the  con- 
tinued rapid  growth  of  the  New  World  during  the  next  twenty  years. 
Transmigration  of  the  Trident  -  -  -  -  -      361 

Compilation  from  Joy's  writings,  &c.    Fuller.    Age,  &c.        -  361,  362 

To  William  II.  Winder.    Montpellier,  September  15  363 

Call  for  approval  of  character  of  W.'s  father,  and  conduct  at  the  bat- 
tle of  Bladensburg.  His  gallantry,  &c,  and  peculiar  difficulties. 
Evidence  on  record  and  verdict  of  Court  of  Inquiry  -  -      363 

To  Isaac  S.  Lyon.   Montpellier,  September  20         -  -  -  -      364 

Application  for  orations,  addresses,  speeches,  &c.     Pamphlet  edition 
of  speeches  on  the  Commercial  Resolutions.    Lloyd's  stenographic 
reports  very  defective  and  often  erroneous.    Limits  of  revision     -      364 
To  Mann  Butler.    October  11 364 

Gardoqui's  overture,  if  the  people  of  Kentucky  would  erect  them- 
selves into  an  independent  State,  &c.  Communicated  in  1788  by 
John  Brown.  Impatience  of  the  Western  people,  and  distrust  of 
Federal  policy,  on  question  of  Mississippi  river.  Brown  a  friend  of 
the  Union.  Butler's  historical  task.  Wilkinson.  Jefferson  364,  365,  366 
To  Edward  Coles.    October  15 366 

Nature  of  letter  of  August  29.  [Ante,  p.  354 — 359.]  Omitted  topics. 
Repetition  of  opinion  that  Gen.  Jackson's  popularity  and  example 
are  losing,  and  the  doctrines  and  example  of  S.  Carolina  are  gain- 
ing, ground.    A  possibility  opposed  to  a  moral  certainty  -  366,  367 

J.  M.'s  known  opinions  on  the  Bank,  the  Tariff,  and  Nullification. 
Manifestations  of  public  sentiment  on  these  questions.  Absorbing 
question  of  Executive  misrule.  Nullification  propagating  itself  un- 
der the  name  of  State  rights,  &c.  Aspect  in  which  it  is  presented 
in  a  late  speech  of  the  reputed  author  of  the  heresy.  "  Letters  of 
gold"   ---------      367 

Distinction  between  the  custody  and  the  absolute  use  or  appropria- 
tion of  the  public  money,  insisted  on  367,  368 

Innovating  doctrines  of  the  Senate  :  Claim,  on  constitutional  ground, 
to  a  share  in  the  removal,  as  well  as  appointment,  of  officers.  Ob- 
jections        .-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -      368 

Claim  for  the  Legislature  of  a  discretionary  regulation  of  the  tenure 

of  offices.     Objections 368,  369 

Alleged  limitation  of  the  qualified  veto  of  the  President  to  consti- 


xlii  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

1834. —  Continued. 
tutional  objections.    It  certainly  extends  to  cases  of  inexpediency 
also,  and  was  so  understood  and  indicated.    The  Federalist.    Bank 
veto  in  1815.    Great  objects  of  the  provision.    Previous  experience 

Innovation  relating  to  the  power  of  the  Executive  to  make  diplomatic 
and  consular  appointments  in  the  recess  of  the  Senate.  Previous 
"  practice  to  make  such  appointments  to  places  calling  for  them, 
whether  the  places  had  or  had  not  before  received  them."  Jeffer- 
son's administration.  Present  assumption  that  the  appointments  can 
be  made  only  to  places  which  had  been  previously  filled.  The  error 
of  it  lies  in  confounding  foreign  missions,  under  the  law  of  nations, 
with  municipal  officers  under  the  local  law.  Construction  regard- 
ing those  missions  not  as  oflSces,  but  as  stations  or  agencies.  Doc- 
trine of  the  Senate  would  be  as  injurious  in  practice  as  unfounded 
in  authority.  Illustrations.  Difficulty  involved  in  the  new  doctrine 
in  providing  for  treaties,  &c.  Attempt  to  derive  a  power  in  the 
President  to  provide  for  the  case  of  terminating  a  war  from  his  mil- 
itary power  to  establish  a  truce  -  3G9. 

Claim  for  the  Senate  of  a  right  to  be  consulted  by  the  President,  and 
to  give  their  advice  previous  to  his  foreign  negotiations.  Result  of 
a  direct  or  analogous  experiment.    Objection  -  -  370,371 

As  to  proofs  of  the  reality  of  these  claims.    Suggestion  of  a  free  and 
full  conversation,  &c.  -------      371 

To  Edward  Everett.    Montpellier,  October  22  -  -  -  -      371 

Commendation  of  E.'s  eulogy  on  La  Fayette.    Binney's  speech  -      371 

To  the  New  England  Society  in  New  York.    December  20  -  -      372 

Invitation  to  an  anniversary  celebration  of,  &c,  their  Pilgrim  Fathers      372 

1835.— [P.  372—395.] 

To  Doctor  Daniel  Drake.    Montpellier,  January  12  -  -  -  -      372 

D.'s  "Discourse  on  the  history,  character,  and  prospects  of  the  West." 
Usefulness  of  such  examples.  Hasty  prophesies  of  a  division  of  the 
Union  into  East  and  West.  Positive  advantages  of  the  Union.  Ill 
consequences  of  disunion.  Border  and  other  wars.  Slaveholding 
and  other  States.  Higher-toned  governments,  especially  in  the  Ex- 
ecutive branch.  Military  establishments,  &c.  Increased  expenses. 
Abridgment  or  exclusion  of  taxes  on  consumption.  Entangling  al- 
liances -------  372,  373 

To  Henry  Clay.    January  31  --....      374 

C.'s  report  on  relations  with  France.  Danger  of  rupture.  Doctrine 
in  the  message  and  in  the  report,  &c.  Peremptory  alternative  of 
compliance  or  self-redress.  Deprecation  of  a  war  between  the  two 
nations.  Ominous  cast  of  a  maritime  war  to  which  U.  S.  should  be 
a  party  and  G.  B.  neutral.  Belligerent  rights  of  search  and  seizure. 
Rule  of  "free  ships  free  goods."  Tendency  of  the  new  rules  in 
favor  of  the  neutral  flag.    Advantage  given  by  them  to  nations 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  x^ 

PAGE. 

1835. —  Continued. 
which  keep  up  large  navies  in  time  of  peace  orer  nations  dispensing 
with  them  --....  37^  375 

February  12  -  -  -  -  -     375 

•  View  "I"  the  Committee  power  of  Congress."    Two-fold  charac- 
t  legislative  and  a  judicial  body.    Desiderated 
:  the  privileges  and  authorities  of  the  several 
departments,  &c.         -------      375 

Van  Buren.    February  18      -----  -     376 

tendatioh  of  J.  Q.  Adams's  oration  on  the  •'  Life  and  character 

376 
ho  Trumbull.     .March  I  ------      376 

letter  in  N.  V.  Commercial  Advertiser.    Reason  for  the  omission 
of  the  battle  of  Bun  I<-t  Bill  as  one  of  four  paintings  authorized  by 

isolution  "i  I  -----  376^  377 

A  A.  N.  Riddle,  Committee.    Montpellier,  March  25       -     377 
Invitation  "  to  ■  celebration  by  the  native  citizens  of  Ohio  of  the  an- 
niversary of  her  Brst  settlement  In  1788."    Progress  of  Ohio  under 
the  nurturing  1  t  of  the  Federal  Councils.    Prospect  -     377 

A.  Duer.    Montpellier,  June  5  -  378 

Pinckney's  1  ft  Constitution.    Plan  printed  in  the 

Journal  not  the  plan  actually  presented  by  him.    Bow  only  that 
men!  Is  noticed  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Convention.    Not 
among  the  papers  left  with  President  Washington,  Ac.    Furnished 
lams.   Evidence  on  the  face  of  the  Journals.   I'inck- 
pamphlel  tancies  between  the  plan  as  furnished  to 

\         .  d  in  tile  pamphlet  -  -  -378,379,380 

tare.    EL  Randolph's  resolutions.    Leading  part  of  Virginia 

in  reference  to  the  Federal  Convention.    Course  of  proceeding. 

Iton's  plan.    Original  draught  in  possession  of  his  family.  In- 

.!.-.    1  desultory  manner  of  taking  them. 

Prej  1  ither  Martin's  dia  olored  representations.* The  party 

he  afterwards  joined.    D.'s  father     -  -  -  -         380,381 

President  Washington  National  Monument  So- 
ciety.   July  25    -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -     382 

eddenoy  of  the  Society.    Chief  Justice  Marshall        -     382 

i  Hubbard  Taylor.    Montpellier,  Augusl  15  ...  -      382 

Publio  affaire.    Medical  Illustrations.    The  Union.    Age,  Ac.  •      383 

>  Richard  0.  Cutis.    September  12  -  -  -  -  -     383 

Choice  of  ■  profession.    The  law.    Crowded  state  of  the  professions, 

Philosophy  and  literature,    Cicero       ...         383,384 
i  Montpellier,  October  11      -  384 

r  and  medal  from  Goddard.    Temperance.    Health.    Kip  Raps      384 
ToChail.-  Lami     Montpellier,  Augusl  -  -  -      385 

in  appeal "  from  the  new  to  the  old  Whigs.    Dissent  from  claims 
for  tli''  Senate  of  a  share  in  the  removal  from  cilices,  and  for  the 
*  See  Yates's  "Secret  Debates,"  p.  9—94. 


xlii  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1834. —  Continued. 
tutional  objections.    It  certainly  extends  to  cases  of  inexpediency 
also,  and  was  so  understood  and  indicated.    The  Federalist.    Bank 
veto  in  1815.    Great  objects  of  the  provision.    Previous  experience       369 

Innovation  relating  to  the  power  of  the  Executive  to  make  diplomatic 
and  consular  appointments  in  the  recess  of  the  Senate.  Previous 
"  practice  to  make  such  appointments  to  places  calling  for  them, 
whether  the  places  had  or  had  not  before  received  them."  Jeffer- 
son's administration.  Present  assumption  that  the  appointments  can 
be  made  only  to  places  which  had  been  previously  filled.  The  error 
of  it  lies  in  confounding  foreign  missions,  under  the  law  of  nations, 
with  municipal  officers  under  the  local  law.  Construction  regard- 
ing those  missions  not  as  offices,  but  as  stations  or  agencies.  Doc- 
trine of  the  Senate  would  be  as  injurious  in  practice  as  unfounded 
in  authority.  Illustrations.  Difficulty  involved  in  the  new  doctrine 
in  providing  for  treaties,  &c.  Attempt  to  derive  a  power  in  the 
President  to  provide  for  the  case  of  terminating  a  war  from  his  mil- 
itary power  to  establish  a  truce         -  3G9,  370 

Claim  for  the  Senate  of  a  right  to  be  consulted  by  the  President,  and 
to  give  their  advice  previous  to  his  foreign  negotiations.  Result  of 
a  direct  or  analogous  experiment.    Objection  -  -  370,  371 

As  to  proofs  of  the  reality  of  these  claims.    Suggestion  of  a  free  and 

full  conversation,  &c.  -  -  -  -  -  -  -371 

To  Edward  Everett.    Montpellier,  October  22  -  -  -      371 

Commendation  of  E.'s  eulogy  on  La  Fayette.    Binney's  speech  -      371 

To  the  New  Eugland  Society  in  New  York.    December  20  -  -      372 

Invitation  to  an  anniversary  celebration  of,  &c,  their  Pilgrim  Fathers      372 

1835.— [P.  372—395.] 

To  Doctor  Daniel  Drake.    Montpellier,  January  12  -  -  -  -      372 

D.'s  "  Discourse  on  the  history,  character,  and  prospects  of  the  West." 
Usefulness  of  such  examples.  Hasty  prophesies  of  a  division  of  the 
Union  into  East  and  West,  Positive  advantages  of  the  Union.  Ill 
consequences  of  disunion.  Border  and  other  wars.  Slaveholding 
and  other  States.  Higher-toned  governments,  especially  in  the  Ex- 
ecutive branch.  Military  establishments,  &c.  Increased  expenses. 
Abridgment  or  exclusion  of  taxes  on  consumption.  Entangling  al- 
liances ----...  372,  373 

To  Henry  Clay.    January  31  ----._      374 

C.'s  report  on  relations  with  France.  Danger  of  rupture.  Doctrine 
in  the  message  and  in  the  report,  &c.  Peremptory  alternative  of 
compliance  or  self-redress.  Deprecation  of  a  war  between  the  two 
nations.  Ominous  cast  of  a  maritime  war  to  which  U.  S.  should  be 
a  party  and  G.  B.  neutral.  Belligerent  rights  of  search  and  seizure. 
Rule  of  "free  ships  free  goods."  Tendency  of  the  new  rules  in 
favor  of  the  neutral  flag.    Advantage  given  by  them  to  nations 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  x\[[{ 

PAGE. 

1835. —  Continued. 
which  keep  up  large  navies  in  time  of  peace  over  nations  dispensing 
with  them,  &c.  --._..  374^  375 

To  C.  J.  Ingersoll.    February  12       -  -  -  -  -  -      375 

I.'s  "  View  of  the  Committee  power  of  Congress."    Two-fold  charac- 
ter of  the  Senate  as  a  legislative  and  a  judicial  body.     Desiderated 
investigation,  &c,  of  the  privileges  and  authorities  of  the  several 
departments,  &c.  -------      375 

To  M.  Van  Buren.    February  18       -  -  -  -  -  -      376 

Commendation  of  J.  Q.  Adams's  oration  on  the  "  Life  and  character 

of  La  Fayette " 376 

To  John  Trumbull.    March  1  ------      376 

T.'s  letter  in  N.  Y.  Commercial  Advertiser.    Reason  for  the  omission 
of  the  battle  of  Bunker  Hill  as  one  of  four  paintings  authorized  by 
a  resolution  of  Congress         -  376,  377 

To  A.  G.  Gano  and  A.  N.  Riddle,  Committee.    Montpellier,  March  25        -      377 
Invitation  '•'  to  a  celebration  by  the  native  citizens  of  Ohio  of  the  an- 
niversary of  her  first  settlement  in  1788."    Progress  of  Ohio  under 
the  nurturing  protection  of  the  Federal  Councils.    Prospect  -      377 

To  W.  A.  Duer.    Montpellier,  June  5  -----      373 

C.  Pinckney's  proposed  plan  of  a  Constitution.    Plan  printed  in  the 
Journal  not  the  plan  actually  presented  by  him.    How  only  that 
document  is  noticed  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Convention.    Not 
among  the  papers  left  with  President  Washington,  &c.     Furnished 
to  Secretary  Adams.  Evidence  on  the  face  of  the  Journals.  Pinck- 
ney's pamphlet.    Discrepancies  between  the  plan  as  furnished  to 
A.,  and  as  described  in  the  pamphlet            ...  378,  379,  380 
A  conjecture.    E.  Randolph's  resolutions.    Leading  part  of  Virginia 
in  reference  to  the  Federal  Convention.    Course  of  proceeding. 
Hamilton's  plan.    Original  draught  in  possession  of  his  family.  In- 
accuracy, &c,  of  Yates's  notes.    Desultory  manner  of  taking  them. 
Prejudices.  Luther  Martin's  discolored  representations.*  The  party 
he  afterwards  joined.    D.'s  father     -           -           -                      38O,  381 
To  W.  Cranch,  First  Vice  President  Washington  National  Monument  So- 
ciety.   July  25 382 

Accepts  the  Presidency  of  the  Society.    Chief  Justice  Marshall  r      382 

To  Hubbard  Taylor.    Montpellier,  August  15  -  -  -  -      382 

Public  affairs.    Medical  illustrations.    The  Union.    Age,  &c.  •       383 

To  Richard  D.  Cutts.    September  12  -----      383 

Choice  of  a  profession.    The  law.    Crowded  state  of  the  professions, 
&c.    Philosophy  and  literature.    Cicero        -  383,  384 

To  President  Jackson.    Montpellier,  October  11      -  -  -  -      384 

Letter  and  medal  from  Goddard.     Temperance.    Health.     Rip  Raps       384 
To  Charles  Francis  Adams.    Montpellier,  August  13  385 

"  An  appeal "  from  the  new  to  the  old  Whigs.    Dissent  from  claims 
for  the  Senate  of  a  share  in  the  removal  from  offices,  and  for  the 
*  See  Yates's  "Secret  Debates,"  p.  9 — 94. 


xliv  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAOB, 

1835. — Continued. 

Legislature  an  authority  to  regulate  its  te "e,    Rigbl  of  suffrage, 

rule  of  apportioning  representation,  and  mode  of  appointing  to  and 
removing  from  office,  fundamentals  in  a  free  Government,  and 
ought  to  be  Qxed  by  the  Constitution.  Why.  The  equilibrium  of 
the  Government,  may  be  disturbed  by  freight  added  to  the  Execu- 
tive scale  by  an  unforeseen  multiplication  of  officers.  Guard,  &c., 
in  regulations  within  the  scope  of  the  legislative  power  ;  or,  if  ne- 
cessary, by  amendment  of  Constitution        ...  385?  386 

To  Charles  J.  Ingersoll.    Montpellier,  November  8  -  ...      386 

Commendation  of  I.*s  discourse  ------      380 

To  Robert  II.  Goldsborough.    Montpellier,  December  21    -  -  -      386 

Tobacco  seed.  Vaughan.  George  Mason.  Western  culture  of  ordi- 
nary Tobacco.    Virginia,  Maryland,  and  Cuba  tobacco       -  386,387 

To  Charles  J.  Ingersoll.    Montpellier,  December  30  ...       337 

I.'s  address  at  N.  York.  Universality  and  perpetual  peace  two  essen- 
tial prerequisites  to  a  perfect  freedom  of  external  commerce  over- 
looked by  the  absolutists  on  the  "  let  aloue  theory.'"  Theories,  ex- 
ceptions, and  qualifications:  the  closet  and  experience        -  387,  388 

To  Thomas  Gilmer,  and  others  of  the  Committee     -  -  -  -      388 

Invitation  to  a  public  dinner  in  Albemarle  on  the  4th  of  July.  Deep 
interest  in  the  permanence  and  purity  of  our  institutions,  character- 
ized, as  they  are,  by  a  division  of  the  powers  of  Government  be- 
tween the  States  in  their  united  and  in  their  individual  capacities, 
and  by  defined  relations  between  the  several  department:-.  Sue,  of 
Government.  Experience  of  defects  in  the  first  organization  of  the 
Union.     Happy  fruits  of  the  present  Constitution     -  -  388,  389 

To  the  Committee— Peyton,  Grymes,  and  others  ....  389 
Invitation  to  a  public  dinner  to  J.  M.  Patton.  Acknowledgments.  &c. 
Constancy  of  Virginia  to  great,  &c.,  principles  of  republicanism. 
Our  prosperity  dependent  on  them.  Connexion  of  both  with  the 
preservation  of  the  Union  in  its  integrity,  and  of  the  Constitution 
in  its  purity.  Value  of  the  Union  and  consequences  of  disunion. 
Contrast  of  the  condition  from  which  the  Constitution  rescued  the 
couutry.with  our  condition  under  it.  Prospect  opened  on  the  civ- 
ilized world.  Unexampled  blessings.  Republicanism  the  vital  prin- 
ciple in  the  compound  Government  of  the  U.  S.   Esto  perpetua       389,  390 

Sovereignty    --------        390— 39J 

Sovereignty  of  the  people  of  the  States  in  its  nature  divisible.  Divided 
according  to  Constitution  of  U.  S.  between  the  States  in  their  united 
and  the  States  in  their  individual  capacities.  So  viewed  by  the  Con- 
vention. &c,  and  in  official,  controversial,  and  popular  language. 
&c.  Power  of  the  States  to  surrender  their  whole  sovereignly,  and 
form  themselves  into  a  consolidated  (ioveriiment.  Surrendering 
a  part  and  retaining  the  other  part,  they  formed  a  mixed  Govern- 
ment -------  390,  391 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xlv 

PAGE. 

1835. —  Continued. 

Now  doctrine  that  sovereignty  is  in  its  nature  indivisible,  &c,  and  that 
the  sovereignty  of  each  State  remains  absolute  and  entire.  Some 
contend  that  it  renders  the  States  individually  the  paramount  ex- 
pounders of  the  Constitution  itself     -----      391 

Cause  of  this  discord  of  opinions.  Theory  and  technicality  preferred 
to  facts.  Division  and  depositories  of  political  power  as  laid  down 
in  the  Constitution,  Its  assignment  to  U.  S.  of  certain  powers,  <tc, 
which  are  attributes  of  sovereignty  ;  and  declaration  of  their  prac- 
tical supremacy  over  powers  reserved  to  the  States,  involving  su- 
premacy of  exposition  as  well  as  of  execution  ...      391 

Compact  the  foundation  of  all  power  in  just  and  free  Governments. 
When  the  compact  is  made  by  competent  parties,  and  creates  a  Gov- 
ernment, and  arms  it  not  only  with  a  moral  power,  but  physical 
means  of  execution,  its  real  character  to  be  decided  not  by  its  name 
but  by  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  powers  specified,  and  the  ob- 
ligations imposed         ----...      391 

Suggested  ground  of  compromise.  Advocates  of  State  rights  to  ac- 
knowledge this  rule  of  measuring  the  Federal  share  of  sovereign 
power  under  the  constitutional  compact;  the  other  side  to  concede 
that  the  States  are  not  deprived  by  it  of  that  corporate  existence 
and  political  unity  which  would,  in  the  event  of  a  dissolution,  vol- 
untary or  violent,  of  the  Constitution,  replace  them  in  the  condition 
of  separate  communities,  that  being  the  condition  in  which  they  en- 
tered into  the  compact.— Letter  to  Webster,  March  15,  1833.  [Ante, 

■     P-  293]  -  - 391,  392 

Supposition  of  some,  at  the  period  of  the  Revolution,  that  it  dissolved 
the  social  compact  within  the  Colonies,  &c,  required  a  naturaliza- 
tion of  those  who  had  not  participated  in  the  Revolution.  Contrary 
decision  of  first  Congress  in  the  case  of  the  contested  election  of  W. 
Smith,  a  native  of  S.  Carolina,  but  absent  at  the  date  of  Independ- 
ence.   Dr.  Ramsay      -------      392 

Theory  contemplating  a  certain  number  of  individuals  as  meeting  and 

agreeing  to  form  one  political  society,  in  order,  &c.  -  -      392 

First  supposition,  that  it  was  a  part  of  the  compact  that  the  will  of 
the  majority  should  be  deemed  the  will  of  the  whole,  or  that  this 
was  a  law  of  nature     ----_.,      392 

Its  operation,  that  the  sovereignty  of  the  Society,  as  vested  in  the  ma- 
jority, may  do  whatever  could  be  rightfully  done  by  the  unanimous 
concurrence  of  its  members;  the  reserved  rights  of  individuals  (e. 
g.  conscience)  in  becoming  parties,  &c,  being  beyond  the  legitimate 
reach  of  sovereignty,  wherever  vested,  &c.  -  -  -  392,393 

Question  presented  how  far  the  will  of  a  majority  of  the  society,  by 
virtue  of  its  identity  with  the  will  of  the  society,  can  divide,  modify, 
or  dispose  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  society  -  393 

Practical  considerations :  1.  What  a  majority  of  a  society  has  done, 


xlvi  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAOE. 

1835. —  Continued. 
and  been  universally  regarded  as  having  a  right  to  do.  It  has  not 
only  naturalized,  admitted  into  the  social  compact  again,  but  has 
divided  the  society  itself  into  societies  equally  sovereign.  Exam- 
ples in  the  separation  of  Kentucky  from  Virginia  and  of  Maine 
from  Massachusetts      -------      393 

2.  Not  denied  that  two  States  equally  sovereign  might  be  incorporated 
into  one  by  the  voluntary  and  joint  act  of  majorities  only  in  each. 
Provision  in  Constitution  of  U.  S.  for  such  a  contingency.  This  is 
a  mutual  surrender  of  the  entire  sovereignty.  On  the  same  princi- 
ple, a  partial  incorporation,  by  a  partial  surrender  of  sovereignty, 
is  equally  practicable  if  equally  eligible;  and  if  this  can  be  done  by 
two  States,  it  can  be  done  by  twenty  or  more  -  393 

Exchange  of  sovereign  rights  often  involved  in  Treaties,  in  Confed- 
eracies, and  particularly  in  that  which  preceded  the  present  Consti- 
tution of  U.  S. 393,  394 

A  fact  that  the  Constitution  does  divide  sovereignty.  True  question 
whether  the  allotment  has  been  made  by  competent  authority.  An- 
swer, that  it  was  an  act  of  the  majority  of  the  people  in  each  State 
in  their  highest  sovereign  capacity,  equipollent  to  a  unanimous  act 
of  the  people  composing  the  State  in  that  capacity    -  -  -      394 

The  idea  of  sovereignty  as  divided  between  the  Union  and  the  mem- 
bers composing  the  Union,  forces  itself  into  the  view,  and  even 
into  the  language,  of  strenuous  advocates  of  the  unity  and  indivisi- 
bility of  the  moral  being  created  by  the  social  compact,  e.  g.  Rowan, 
ofKy.    U.  S.  Telegraph.     R.  Enquirer.    Contrast  between  the  vas- 
salage of  subjection  to  a  foreign  sovereignty,  and  the  equal  and  re- 
ciprocal surrender  of  portions  of  sovereignty  by  compacts  among 
sovereign  communities.    Fortunate  attribute  of  free  governments 
in  the  distributing,  &c,  of  the  powers  of  government,  supreme  as 
well  as  subordinate  ------  394,  395 

1835-'G.— [P.  395—425.] 
On  Nullification.    [See  ante,  p.  270]  -  395 — 425 

Recent,  and  nearly  unanimous,  declaration  of  the  Legislature  of  Vir- 
ginia,* that  S.  Carolina  is  not  supported  in  her  doctrine  of  Nullifica- 
tion by  the  Resolutions  of  1798.  That  doctrine,  as  laid  down  in 
the  Report  of  a  special  committee  of  H.  R.  of  S.  Carolina,  in  1S2S.  is: 
"  That  a  single  State  has  a  constitutional  right  to  arrest  the  execu- 
tion of  a  law  of  the  United  States  within  its  limits;  that  the  arrest 
is  to  be  presumed  right  and  valid,  and  is  to  remain  in  force,  unless 
three-fourths  of  the  States,  in  a  Convention,  should  otherwise  de- 
cide."   ---------      395 

*  In  Resolutions  agreed  to  by  both  nouses.  January  26th,  1833.  [See  Acts  oftht  General  Assembly 
of  Virginia,  Session  of  L832-'88,  p.  202.]  A  portion  of  this  paper  on  Nullification  was  written  in 
1833.    See  ante,  p.  270. 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  xlvii 

PAGE. 

1835-'6.—  Continued. 

Position  taken  to  disguise  the  deformity  of  the  naked  creed.  The  true 
question  -------  395,  396 

Disregard  of  the  state  of  things  at  the  date  of  the  proceedings  of 
Virginia,  and  of  the  facts  and  arguments  to  which  they  were  op- 
posed   ---------      396 

Stress  laid  on  3d,  and  disregard  of  7th,  Resolution,  and  of  the  Re- 
port      ..-------      396 

Alien  and  Sedition  laws.  Assertion  of  their  constitutionality,  and  a 
sanction  of  them  by  supreme  judicial  authority  of  TJ.  S.,  was  a  bar 
to  any  interposition  on  the  part  of  the  States,  even  in  the  form  of  a 
legislative  declaration  that  those  laws  were  unconstitutional  -      396 

Main  and  immediate  object  of  Virginia  evidently  being  to  produce  a 
conviction  that  the  Constitution  had  been  violated,  and  a  co-opera- 
tion of  the  other  States  in  effectuating  a  repeal  of  the  acts.  As- 
serted, &c,  right  of  the  States  in  such  cases  to  interpose:  first,  in 
their  constituent  character,  &c;  and  otherwise,  as  specially  pro- 
vided by  the  Constitution,  &c;  and  their  ulterior  right  to  inter- 
pose, notwithstanding  any  decision  of  constituted  authority,  through 
the  last  resort  under  the  forms  of  the  Constitution,  &c.         -  396,  397 

This  view  does  not  exclude  a  natural  right  in  the  States  individually, 
more  than  in  any  portion  of  an  individual  State,  to  seek  relief,  by 
resistence  and  revolution,  against  palpable  and  insupportable 
wrongs  ---------      397 

The  right  of  a  single  State  as  one  of  the  parties,  and  avowing  its  ad- 
herence to  the  Constitution,  to  nullify  a  law  of  U.  S.,  is  a  plain  con- 
tradiction in  terms,  and  a  fatal  inlet  to  anarchy        ...      397 

The  3d  Resolution  of  Virginia.  It  does  not  authorize  the  inference  of 
a  right  in  a  single  State  to  arrest,  &c,  an  act  of  the  General  Gov- 
ernment. The  obvious,  &c,  inference  precludes  such  a  right.  The 
plural  number  (States)  used    -----  397,  398 

Course,  &c,  of  the  reasoning  shows  that  the  interposition  meant,  was 
that  of  the  States,  as  the  parties  to  the  Constitution,  and  the  crea- 
tors of  it  398 

A  claim  by  a  single  party  to  the  Constitution  to  arrest  a  law  not 
guarded  against,  because  a  pretension  so  anomalous,  anarchical, 
&c,  was  not,  and  could  not  be,  anticipated  -  -  -  -      398 

The  nullifying  claim  for  a  single  State  probably  irreconcilable  with 
the  effect  contemplated  by  the  Resolution  for  the  parties  to  the  Con- 
stitution.   Why.    Illustrations  ...  -  398,  399 

Startling  consequences.  Extravagant  presumption  that  no  State 
would  exercise  its  right  in  any  case  not  so  palpably  just,  &c,  as  to 
insure  the  concurrence  of  the  requisite  proportion  of  the  others. 
Comes  from  S.  Carolina  in  the  teeth,  and  at  the  time,  of  her  own  ex- 
ample   ---------      399 

The  presumption  against  the  experience  of  other  countries  and  times, 


xlviii  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

i835-r6.-—C<mHrmeeL 

and  that  among  ourselves.  Examples  of  differences  <>f  opinion.  <&c. 
Carriage  tax  Tariff.  Light-houses.  War,  Ac.  Appellate  author- 
ity of  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.  Nullifying  claims,  reduced  to  prac- 
tice, would  be  a  deadly  poison  to  tbe  Constitution  -  -  399,  400 

The  7th  Resolution  (always  skipped  over  by  the  nullifying  commen- 
tators) repeats  and  re-enforces  the  3d,  and  distinctly  shows  that 
the  course  contemplated  by  the  Legislature  was  nol  ;t  solitary  or 
separate  interposition,  but  a  co-operation  in  the  means  necessary  and 
proper  for  maintaining  the  rights,  &c,  reserved  to  the  States  re- 
spectively        -  -  ....  400,  40. 

Further  elucidation  given  in  the  expunction  of  the  word3  "null, 
void,"  &c,  which  were  in  the  7th  Resolution,  as  originally  pro- 
posed   ---------40: 

Attempt,  by  ascribing  to  the  words  stricken  out  a  nullifying  significa- 
tion, to  fix  on  the  draughtsman  of  the  Resolution  the  character  of 
a  nullifier.  On  that  supposition  the  unanimous  erasure  of  nullify- 
ing expressions  was  an  emphatic  protest  by  the  II.  of  Delegates 
against  the  doctrine  of  S.  Carolina      -----      401 

The  Report.  Circumstances  making  it  the  most  authoritative  evi- 
dence of  the  meaning  attached  by  the  State  to  the  Resolutions.  In- 
excusable disregard  of  it,  &c.  Its  comment  on  the  3d  Resolution. 
Its  conforming  use  of  the  plural  number  "States."  Necessary  im- 
plication of  the  entire  current  and  complexion  of  its  observations, 
&c,  that  the  interposition  meant  was  a  concurring  authority,  not 
the  authority  of  a  single  State.    Particular  passages  -  401,  402,  403 

Objection  that  collective  interposition  could  not  have  been  meant. 
because  that  was  a  right  by  none  denied.  But  as  a  truism,  its  as- 
sertion might  not  be  out  of  place  when  applied  as  in  the  Resolu- 
tion. Truisms  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  in  declara- 
tions of  rights  prefixed  to  the  State  constitutions.  Judicial  author- 
ity of  U.  S.  had  been  asserted  to  be  the  sole  expositor  of  the  Con- 
stitution in  the  last  resort.  Authority  of  Supreme  Court  U.  S.  an 
asserted  bar  to  any  interposition  by  the  States  against  the  A.  and 
S.  laws.  "  Last  resort,"  not  the  last  in  relation  to  the  rights  of  the 
parties  to  the  constitutional  compact,  from  which  the  judicial  as 
well  as  the  other  departments  hold  their  delegated  trusts.  Why. 
Expediency  of  the  declaration,  «tc,  in  the  Resolution.  Recurrence 
to  fundamental  principles,  &c.  Necessity  of  regarding  the  term 
parties  in  its  plural,  not  individual,  meaning,  illustrate. I     -  403,  404 

Comment  of  the  Report  on  the  7th  Resolution.  Extracts.  Answer  to 
objection  that  it  belongs  to  the  Judiciary  of  U.  S.,  and  not  to  the  State- 
Legislatures,  to  declare  the  meaning  of  the  Federal  Constitution. 
A  declaration  that  proceedings  of  the  Federal  Government  are  not 
warranted  by  the  Constitution,  is  not  a  novelty,  &c.  Not  an  as- 
sumption of  the  office  of  the  judge.     Such  a  declaration  distin- 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  x]\z 

TAOB. 

1835-'6. —  Coni  invert. 
guished  from  an  exposition  of  the  Judiciary,  as  to  effect,  &c.    Pro- 
priety of  communicating  it  to  other  States,  and  inviting  (hem  to 
a  like  declaration.    Relations  of  the  State  Legislatures  to  the  Fed- 
eral Legislature  .....  405 y  406 

Expressed  confidence  that  the  necessary  and  proper  measures  would  be 
taken  by  the  other  States  for  co-operating  with  Virginia  in  main- 
taining, &c.  A  proper  object,  and  to  be  pursued  by  means  both 
necessary  and  proper.  What  must  be  shown  in  order  to  find  an  ob- 
jection. No  trace  of  improper  means.  Probable  effect  of  like  dec- 
larations from  other  States.  Other  constitutional  means  might  have 
been  employed.  Reserve  of  the  General  Assembly  in  not  indicating 
to  other  States  a  choice  among  further  means  that  might  become 
necessary  and  proper,  not  censurable  ...  406,  407,  408 

The  intermediate  existence  of  the  State  governments  between  the 
people  and  the  General  Government,  their  vigilance  in  descrying 
symptoms  of  usurpation,  and  promptitude  in  sounding  the  alarm, 
were  topics  used  in  answering  objections  to  the  establishment  of 
the  Constitution.  The  argument  must  be  equally  proper  to  assist 
in  interpreting  it.  Avowals,  introducing  the  proceedings,  and  in  the 
7th  Resolution,  of  attachment  to  the  Union,  &c,  and  fidelity  to  the 
Constitution.    Evidences  of  sincerity,  &c.    -  408 

No  shadow  of  countenance  in  the  Report  to  Nullification.  Fairness  of 
disclaiming  the  inference  from  the  undeniableness  of  a  truth,  that  it 
could  not  be  the  truth  meant  to  be  asserted  in  the  Resolution. 
Those  who  resolve  the  nullifying  claim  into  the  natural  right  to  re- 
sist intolerable  oppression,  are  precluded  from  inferring  that  to  be 
the  right  meant  by  the  Resolution,  and  why-  -  -  -      409 

True  question,  whether  there  be  a  constitutional  right  in  a  single  State 
to  nullify  a  law  of  U.  S.  Absurdity  of  such  a  claim  in  its  naked  and 
suicidal  form.  Modified  by  S.  Carolina  into  a  right  in  every  State 
to  resist  within  itself  the  execution  of  a  Federal  law  deemed  by  it 
to  be  unconstitutional,  and  to  demand  a  Convention  of  the  States  to 
decide  the  question  of  constitutionality ;  the  annulment  of  the  law 
to  continue  in  the  mean  time,  and  to  be  permanent  unless  three- 
fourths  of  the  States  concur  in  annulling  the  amendment     -  -      409 

Results  during  the  temporary  Nullification  of  the  law  the  same  as  those 
of  an  unqualified  Nullification ;  seven  out  of  twenty-four  States  might 
make  the  temporary  results  permanent;  thus  any  State  which  could 
obtain  the  concurrence  of  six  others  might  abrogate  any  law  of  U. 
S.  constructively,  and  shape  the  Constitution  at  pleasure  against  the 
will  of  the  other  seventeen,  each  of  the  seventeen  having  an  equal 
right  and  authority  with  each  of  the  seven;  and  in  the  end.  what  had 
been  unanimously  agreed  to  as  a  whole,  would  not,  as  a  whole,  be 
agreed  to  by  a  [any]  single  party.  Amount  of  the  modified  right  of 
Nullification  is,  that  a  single  State  may  arrest  the  operation  of  a  law 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAOE. 

1835-'6.— Continued. 
of  U.S.,  and  institute  a  process  which  is  to  terminate  in  the  ascend- 
ency of  a  minority  over  a  large  majority  in  a  republican  system,  the 
characteristic  feature  of  which  is,  that  the  major  will  is  the  ruling 
will 409,  410 

Attempt  to  father  this  new-fangled  theory  on  Jefferson  in  the  teeth  of 
his  Inaugural  Address.  Declaration  of  Virginia  in  1833  that  the  Res- 
olutions of  '98-'99  gave  no  support  to  the  Nullifying  doctrine  of  S. 
Carolina.  The  document  procured  from  Jefferson's  files  and  ap- 
pealed to  by  the  Nullifying  partisans,  rescues  his  meaning  from  any 
such  imputation,  or  from  having  expressed  any  opinion  sanctioning 
any  Constitutional  right  of  Nullification.  [See  paper  cited  as  Mr. 
Jefferson's  original  draught  of  the  Kentucky  Resolutions.]  This  doc- 
ument expressly  calls  the  remedial  right  of  Nullification  a  natural 
right;  and,  consequently,  not  a  right  derived  from  the  Constitution, 
but  from  abuses  or  usurpations,  releasing  the  parties  to  it  from  their 
obligation.  Doctrine  of  Constitutional  Nullification  irreconcilable 
with  J.'s  opinions,  &c.  His  letters  to  Giles,  J.  M.,  and  W.  C.  Nich- 
olas       410,  411 

Alleged  instances  of  successful  Nullification,  by  particular  States,  of 
the  authority  and  laws  of  U.  S.     Explanation  and  comment  411,  412 

Conduct  of  Pennsylvania.  The  final  acquiescence,  &c.  Opinions  of 
Judges  McKean  and  Tilghman  superseded,  <fcc.         ...      412 

Attempt  to  show  that  the  Resolutions  of  Virginia  contemplated  forci- 
ble resistence.  Law  relating  to  the  armory,  enacted  prior  to  the 
A.  and  S.  laws.  Law  relating  to  the  habeas  corpus,  a  general  law, 
&c,  not  necessarily  precluding  acquiescence  in  the  action  of  the 
Federal  Judiciary.  Possibility  of  cases  justifying  the  States  in  a 
resort  to  the  natural  law  of  self-preservation.  Moderate  views  of 
Virginia  on  the  critical  occasion  of  the  A.  and  S.  laws.  Terms  of 
7th  Resolution.  Its  bearing  on  the  3d.  Unanimous  erasure  of  the 
words  "  null,  void,*'  <tc.  Condemnation  and  imprisonment  of  Cal- 
lender  without  the  slightest  opposition  on  the  part  of  the  State.  Oc- 
casion used  to  exemplify  her  devotion  to  public  order,  &c.  Ex- 
tracts of  letters  from  Governor  Monroe         ...  412,  413 

Question  as  to  mode  of  interposition  by  the  States,  in  their  collective 
character,  as  parties  to  the  Constitution,  against  usurped  power. 
Object,  &c,  of  the  Resolutions,  &c,  did  not  require  it  to  be  pointed 
out.  It  was  sufficient  to  show  that  the  authority,  &c,  existed,  and 
was  a  resort  beyond  that  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.,  or  any  de- 
rived from  the  Constitution.  Authority  plenary,  and  mode  of  its 
own  choice.  Obvious  that  it  might  either  so  explain  or  amend  the 
Constitution  as  to  provide  a  more  satisfactory  mode  within  the  Con- 
stitution of  guarding  it  against  constructive  or  other  violation      413,  414 

Difficulties  of  the  Nullifying  expositors.  Upshur.  Berrien.  Claim  as 
modified  by  S.  Carolina  has  scarce  an  advocate  out  of  the  State. 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  \[ 

PAGE. 

1835-'6.—  Continued. 
Kept  above  there  under  its  disguise.    Result,  &c.    -  -  414,  415 

Summary: 

Concurring  measures  of  the  States,  without  any  Nullifying  interposi- 
tion, did  attain  the  contemplated  object:  a  triumph  over  the  ob- 
noxious Acts,  &c.  As  to  the  influence  of  the  proceedings  of  Vir- 
ginia in  1798-'99.  S.  Carolina  in  favor  of  the  A.  and  S.  laws.  Her 
Nullifying  project  "  an  anomalous  conceit."  Reiteration  of  the  un- 
truth, that  the  right  in  a  single  State  to  interpose  declarations,  &c, 
against  unconstitutional  acts  of  Congress,  had  not  been  denied. 
Vote  of  one-third  of  the  H.  of  Delegates  denying  it.  Their  admis- 
sion as  to  the  right  of  the  States  in  the  capacity  of  parties,  without 
claiming  it  for  a  single  State.  No  squinting  at  the  Nullifying  idea 
in  the  instructions  of  the  Legislature  in  1799-1800.  Protest  of  the 
minority.  Report  of  committee  of  Congress  on  the  proceedings  of 
Virginia  -------  416,  417 

Remedies  under  Government  of  U.  S.  against  usurpations  of  power. 
Checks  provided  among  the  constituted  authorities;  influence  of  the 
ballot  boxes  and  hustings;  appeal  to  the  power  which  made  the 
Constitution,  and  can  explain,  amend,  or  remake  it.  This  resort 
failing,  and  the  usurped  power  being  sustained,  &c,  by  a  majority, 
elements  in  the  calculation  as  to  the  final  course  to  be  pursued  by 
the  minority.  Same  view  belongs  to  every  one  of  the  States.  Re- 
served rights  of  every  citizen  -  ....  417,418 

Astonishing  boldness  of  the  doctrine  that  the  Constitution  of  U.  S.  is 
a  treaty  or  league,  or  at  most  a  confederacy  among  nations,  as  in- 
dependent and  sovereign  in  relation  to  each  other,  as  before  the 
Constitution  was  formed.  Denunciation,  as  heretics  and  apostates, 
of  adherents  to  the  tenets,  &c,  of  their  fathers         ...      418 

Every  right  has  its  remedy.  The  remedy  under  the  Constitution  lies 
where  it  has  been  marked  out  by  the  Constitution.  Appeal  to  the 
parties  having  an  authority  above  the  Constitution.  Law  of  nature. 
The  allegation  that  because  an  unconstitutional  law  is  no  law,  it 
may  be  constitutionally  disobeyed  by  all  who  think  it  unconstitu- 
tional, a  sophism;  and  why    -----  418,419 

Main  pillar  of  Nullification.  Assumption  that  sovereignty  is  a  unit, 
indivisible  and  unalienable.  Inferences.  The  Constitution  of  U. 
S.  necessarily  the  offspring  of  a  Sovereign  authority.  Characteris- 
tics of  the  Government  of  U.  S.  -  -  -  -  419,  420 

Residence  of  the  sovereignty  of  U.  S.  and  of  the  sovereignty  of  each 
State.  The  States  sovereign  to  the  extent  of  the  objects  embraced 
by  their  respective  constitutions,  though  shorn  of  many  essential 
attributes  of  sovereignty.  The  U.  States,  by  virtue  of  the  sovereign 
attributes  with  which  they  are  endowed,  sovereign  to  that  extent, 
though  destitute  of  the  attributes  of  which  the  States  are  not  shorn. 
This  the  political  system  of  the  U.  S.,  de  jure  and  de  facto   -  -      420 


Jii  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

1835-6.— Continued. 

Abstract  and  technical  modes  of  expounding  and  designating  its  char- 
acter, to  be  abandoned.  It  is  to  be  viewed  as  a  system  hitherto 
without  a  model;  as  neither  a  simple  nor  a  consolidated  government, 
nor  a  government  altogether  confederate;  therefore  not  to  be  ex- 
plained so  as  to  make  it  either,  but  to  be  explained  and  designated 
according  to  the  actual  division  and  distribution  of  political  power 
on  the  face  of  the  instrument  ------      420 

A  just  inference  from  this  political  system.  Diversified  modifications 
of  which  the  representative  principle  of  republicanism  is  suscepti- 
ble, with  a  view  to  the  conditions,  opinions,  and  habits  of  particu- 
lar communities  ------  420,  421 

A  denial  of  Sovereignty  to  the  Slates  in  their  united  characters  may  well 
excite  wonder.  The  Convention  which  formed  the  Constitution  an- 
nounced it  as  dividing  sovereignty  between  the  Union  and  the  States. 
Letter  of  Washington',  President  of  the  Convention,  to  the  old  Con- 
gress. The  Constitution  presented  under  that  view  by  contempo- 
rary expositions  recommending  it  to  the  ratifying  authorities.  The 
"  Federalist,"  &c.  Proved,  by  language  constantly  and  notoriously 
applied  to  it,  to  have  been  so  understood.  This  language,  Ac.,  con- 
tinued, till  very  lately,  even  by  present,  leaders,  in  making  a  denial 
of  [the  principle]  the  basis  of  the  novel  notion  of  Nullification.  Re- 
port to  the  Legislature  of  S.  Carolina  in  1828.  Rowan's  speech  in 
the  Richmond  Enquirer.    Jefferson.    Illustration  from  Burr's  case      421 

The  Sovereignty  of  U.  S.  the  only  supposition  on  which  rest  interna- 
tional relations  between  them  and  foreign  Governments.  Illustra- 
tions      421,  422 

The  Government  of  U.  S.,  like  all  Governments,  free  in  their  princi- 
ples, rests  on  compact:  a  compact,  not  between  the  Government 
and  the  parties  who  formed  and  live  under  it,  but  among  the  par- 
ties themselves.     What  are  the  strongest  Governments        -  -      422 

Compact,  in  the  case  of  U.  S.,  duly  formed,  and  by  the  highest  Sov- 
ereign authority.  What  this  authority  might  have  done  and  what 
it  did.  The  undeniable  obligation  resulting  from  the  compact.  Il- 
lustrations. The  faith  pledged  in  the  compact  the  vital  principle 
of  all  free  government.  Consequence.  AVhatever  be  the  mode  in 
which  the  essential  authority  established  the  Constitution,  the 
Btructure,  &c,  &c,  must  be  the  same,  &c.  Whether  the  phrase 
"We,  the  people,"  means  the  people  in  their  aggregate  capacity, 
acting  by  a  numerical  majority  of  the  whole,  or  by  a  majority  iu 
each  of  the  States,  the  authority  being  equally  valid  and  binding, 
the  question  is  interesting  but  as  a  historical  fact  of  merely  specu- 
lative curiosity  ------  422,  423 

Relative  force  of  centripetal  and  centrifugal  tendency.  The  test  not 
the  mode  of  the  grant,  but  the  extent  and  effect  of  the  powers 
granted.  The  only  distinctive  circumstance.  Letter  to  D.  Webster  423,424 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  liii 

PAGE. 

1835-'6.—  Continued. 
Those  who  deny  the  possibility  of  a  political  system,  with  a  divided 
Sovereignty  like  that  of  U.  S.,  must  choose  between  a  Government 
purely  consolidated  and  an  association  of  Governments  purely  Fed- 
eral. Lessons  of  history  as  to  each.  Effect  of  them,  and  of  the  fail- 
ure of  an  experiment  at  home  in  inducing  the  U.  S.  to  adopt  a  mod- 
ification of  political  power,  which  aims  so  to  distribute  it  as  to  avoid 
as  well  the  evils  of  Consolidation  as  the  defects  of  Federation,  and 
obtain  the  advantages  of  both.  Montesquieu.  Success,  hitherto, 
of  the  new  and  compound  system  beyond  any  former  polity,  ancient 
or  modern,  &c.  To  deny  the  possibility  of  a  system  partly  Federal 
and  partly  consolidated,  and  to  desire  to  convert  ours  into  one 
wholly  Federal  or  wholly  Consolidated,  in  neither  of  which  forms 
have  individual  rights,  public  order  and  external  safety,  been  all 
duly  maintained,  is  to  aim  a  deadly  blow  at  the  last  hope  of  true 
liberty  on  the  face  of  the  earth.  Considerations.  An  effective  pro- 
vision for  the  peaceable  decision  of  controversies  arising  within  itself, 
obviously  essential  to  a  political  system.  Otherwise,  it  would  be  a 
Government  in  name  only.  The  provision  cannot  be  either  peace- 
able or  effective  by  making  every  part  an  authoritative  umpire.  Final 
appeal  must  be  to  the  authority  of  the  whole.  This  view  taken  while 
the  Constitution  was  under  the  consideration  of  the  People,  and  dic- 
tated certain  provisions  in  it.  Federalist  No.  39.  Constitution  of 
U.  S.,  Art.  6,  Art.  1.    This  will  be  the  permanent  view,  &c.  424,  425 

1836— [P.  426— 436.] 

To  William  C.  Rives.    January  26    -  -  -  -  -  -      426 

Controversy  with  France.    Possible  interposition  by  G.  B.  of  friendly 
offices    ---------      426 

To  Caleb  Cashing.    Montpelier,  February  9  -  -  -  -      426 

C.'s  speech  on  the  right  of  petition.    Obscure  passage  of  a  speech  of 
J.  M.  in  the  first  Congress        ------      426 

To  Committee  of  Cincinnati.    February  20  -  -  -  -  -      427 

Invitation  to  a  public  dinner  on  4th  of  March,  to  celebrate  expiration 
of  charter  of  U.  S.  Bank.    Retaining  formerly  expressed  opinions 
that  the  nation  had  decided  the  Bank  to  be  Constitutional,  declines 
to  participate  in  a  protest  against  it  as  being  unconstitutional        -      427 
To  Joseph  Wood.    February  27        -  -  -  -  -      427 

Acquaintance  with  Chief  Justice  Ellsworth.  His  talents,  reasoning, 
elocution,  services  in  the  Convention  of  1787,  in  the  Senate  of  U.  S., 
and  in  the  Supreme  Court.  He  draughted  the  bill  organizing  the 
Judicial  department.    No  epistolary  correspondence  with  him      427,  428 

To •     March         -------      428 

B.  W.  Leigh's  letter  to  the  General  Assembly.  Different  opinions  in  both 
G.  B.  and  U.  S.  as  to  the  right  of  instruction.  The  act  of  the  rep- 
resentative being  equally  valid,  whether  the  instruction  be  obeyed 


ljv  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE 

1836. — Continued. 
or  disobeyed,  the  question  is  a  moral  one  between  him  and  bis  con- 
stituents. If  satisfied  that  it  expresses  their  will,  he  is  to  decide 
whether  he  will  conform  to  an  instruction  opposed  to  his  judgment, 
or  will  incur  their  displeasure  by  disobeying  it;  they  to  decide  in 
what  mode  they  will  manifest  their  displeasure.  In  cases  of  con- 
science, its  dictates  must  be  bis  guide  ...  428,  429 

Equality  of  the  States  in  the  Federal  Senate;  a  compromise  between 
the  conflicting  claims  of  the  larger  and  the  smaller  States.  When 
the  smaller  States  had  secured  more  than  a  proportional  share  in 
the  proposed  Government,  they  became  favorable  to  augmentations 
of  its  powers;  and  under  its  administration,  have  generally  leaned 
to  it  in  contests  between  it  and  the  State  governments.  Whether 
effect  of  instructions  making  Senators  dependent  on  the  pleasure  of 
their  constituents  would  be  more  favorable  to  the  General  Govern- 
ment or  the  State  governments,  is  a  question  not  tested  by  practice. 
Does  not  accord  with  L.?s  anticipation  ...  -      429 

Tenure  of  the  Senate  meant  as  an  obstacle  to  instability.  Effect  of 
innovations  impairing  the  stability  afforded  by  that  tenure,  &c.    429,  430 

Alternate  popularity  and  unpopularity  of  each  of  the  great  branches 
of  the  Federal  Government.  Vicissitudes  in  the  apparent  tenden- 
cies in  the  Federal  and  State  governments  to  encroach  each  on  the 
authorities  of  the  other.  Uncertainty  as  to  final  operation  of  the 
causes  as  heretofore  existing;  and  as  to  influences  from  increasing 
territory,  multiplication  of  States,  great  and  growing  power  of 
some  States,  absence  of  external  danger,  combinations  or  collisions 
of  States,  and  from  contumacy  of  unsuccessful  parties  to  controver- 
sies judicially  decided-  ......      430 

Uncertain  effects  of  a  dense  population,  <kc,  &c.  Far  from  despond- 
ing of  the  great  political  experiment  of  the  American  people.  Its 
continued  prosperity  through  mauy  years.  Favorable  expectations 
from  the  progress,  «fcc,  of  political  science;  from  geographical, 
commercial,  and  social  ligaments,  strengthened,  as  they  are,  by 
mechanical  improvements;  "  and,  above  all,  by  the  obvious  and 
inevitable  consequences  of  the  wreck  of  an  ark,  bearing,  as  we 
have  flattered  ourselves,  the  happiness  of  our  country  and  the  hope 
of  the  world."  The  four  great  religious  sects,  running  through  all 
the  States,  will  oppose  an  event  placing  parts  of  each  under  separ- 
ate Governments.  Phenomena  of  an  ill  omen.  Encouraging  con- 
siderations ..--.--  430,  431 
To  C.  Fenimore  Williston.    March  19  431 

Bentham's  proposed  "  codification  for  U.  S.,"  &c.    Tract  containing 

his  correspondence,  &c.    J.  Q.  Adams  ....      431 

To  W.  C.  Rives.    Montpellier,  April  19  432 

R.'s  speech,  [in  U.  S.  Senate,  on  the  expunging  Resolution.]  Im- 
portance of  preserving  the  original  journals  of  the  Legislature. 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 


lv 


183G. —  Continued. 

Difficulty,  &c,  as  to  journals  of  the  Virginia  Legislature.    Increas- 
ing infirmities  ----._..      433 

To  Benjamin  Watkins  Leigh.    Montpellier,  May  1    -  -  -  -      432 

L.'s  speech,  [in  U.  S.  Senate,  on  the  expunging  Resolution.]    Pecu- 
liar value  of  the  original  journals.    Late  example  in  Virginia       432,  433 
To  C.  Fenimore  AVilliston.    May  13  -  -  -  -  -  .  _      433 

Codification,  &c.    Bentham.    Revisions  of  State  laws.    [Old]  Revised 

Code  of  Virginia.     E.  Livingston        -  433 

[From  J.  C.  Payne]  to  C.  J.  Ingersoll.    Montpellier,  May  14  -  -      434 

Questions  with  G.  B.  of  free  goods  and  free  sailors  in  neutral  vessels, 
blockades,  contraband  of  war,  &c.  Former  letter.  Prospect  of 
the  Trident  passing  to  this  hemisphere.  Effects  of  a  reform  of  bel- 
ligerent claims  on  the  ocean,  in  changing  neutral  relations.  G.  B. 
and  blockades.  Merry.  Protest  of  U.  S.  against  Admiral  Duck- 
worth's spurious  blockade  of  Martinique  and  Guadalupe  -  -  434 
To  John  Robertson.  Montpellier,  May  23  -  -  -  -  .  435 
R.'s  speech,  [in  H.  R.  on  the  naval  appropriation  bill.]  Distribution 
of  proceeds  of  public  lands.  People  of  U.  S.  rightful  owners  of  the 


fund 


435 


To  George  Tucker.    June  27            ---...  435 

Dedication  of  T.'s  "  Life  of  Jefferson."  Sympathy  in  J.'s  principles 
of  liberty,  &c.  Zeal,  &c,  for  such  a  reconstruction  of  our  political 
system  as  would  provide  for  the  permanent  liberty  and  happiness 

of  TJ.  States.    A  rejoicing  witness  of  its  many  good  fruits    -           -  436 

Advice  to  my  Country          -----..  437 

Appendix  II. 

Instructions  to  Dr.  Franklin  and  Mr.  Jay  concerning  the  Free  Naviga- 
tion op  the  Mississippi,  &c.    October  17, 1780  -  441 

Address  to  the  States,  by  the  United  States,  in  Congress  assembled. 

April  26,  1783 443 

Essays,  etc. 454—484 

1.  Population  and  emigration.    November  19,  1791  -  454 

2.  Consolidation.    December  3,  1791  -  458 

3.  Public  opinion.     1791           ----._  459 

4.  Money.    1791            -------  460 

5.  Government.    December  31,  1791  -  4C7 

6.  Charters.    January  18,  1792             -  457 

7.  Parties.     1792            -------  469 

8.  British  Government.    January  28,  1792      -  469 

9.  Universal  peace.    January  31,  1792            -  470 

10.  Government  of  the  United  Stateo.    February  4,  1792        -           -  472 

11.  Spirit  of  Governments.    February  18,  1792            ...  474 

12.  Republican  distribution  of  citizens.    March  3,  1792          -           -  475 

13.  Fashion.    March  20,  1792    -           -           -           -           -           -  476 


\w[  CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV. 

PAGE. 

Appendix  II. —  Continued. 

14.  Property.    March  27,  1792 478 

15.  The  Union.    Who  are  its  real  friends?    March  SI,  1792    -  -      480 

16.  A  candid  state  of  parties.    September  22, 1792      -  -  -      481 

17.  Who  are  the  best  keepers  of  the  people's  liberties?  December  20, 

1792      .--  -  ....      483 

^Political  Observations.    April  20,  1795     -  -  -  -         485—505 

Virginia  Resolutions.    1798,  1799  -  -  -      .     -  -         506—508 

Address  of  the  General  Assembly  to  the  People  of  the  Commonwealth 

of  Virginia.    January  23,  1799  ...  -         509—514 

Report  on  the  Virginia  Resolutions  at  the  Session  of  1799-1800        515 — 555 
To  Henry  Clay.    Montpellier,  August  30,  1816        ....      556 
Tenders  to  C.  the  appointment  of  Secretary  of  War     -  556 

Correspondence  with  the  Legislature  of  Virginia    -  -  -         556—558 

From  James  P.  Preston,  Governor  of  the  State.     February  28,  1817         -      556 
Transmits  valedictory  address  of  the  Legislature,  &c.  -  556,  557 

To  Governor  Preston.    Washington,  March  1,  1817  ...      557 

To  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia.     Washington.  March  1,  1817  -      557 

Acknowledgments.    Uniform  devotion  of  Virginia  to  free  Govern- 
ment, &c.    The  war,  &c.  557,  558 
Navigation  of  the  Mississippi          .....         558—564 
To  Hezekiah  Niles.    Montpellier,  January  8,  1822   -            -            -  558 
Corrects  an  erroneous  account  in  Ramsay's  History  of  the  American 
Revolution  of  an  instruction  to  Jay.     The  facts  stated         -           559,560 
To  Joseph  Jones.     Philadelphia,  November  25,  1780          ...      561 
To  Joseph  Jones.    December  5,  1780            .....      563 
To  Thomas  Jefferson,  Governor  of  Virginia.    Philadelphia,  December  13, 

1780.     [From  J.  M.,  jr.,  and  Theodorick  Bland]       ...      564 
To  Roger  C.  Weightman,  Mayor  of  Washington,  and  Chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Arrangements.    Montpellier,  June  20,  1826  -  -      564 
Invitation  to  the  celebration  of  the  Fourth  of  July.     (50th  Anniver- 
sary of  American  Independence.)     Acknowledgments.    The  Na- 
tional Metropolis  and  its  citizens,  &c.                                               564,  565 
To  Henry  Clay.    Montpellier,  March  24,  1827           -            -            -  -      565 
Gallatin.    University.    Pamphlet  on  the  British  doctrine  against  a 
neutral  trade  with  belligerent  ports  -----      565 
To  Henry  Clay.   Montpellier  January  6,  1828         ....      566 
C.'s  "Address,'' [December,  1827.]     Brougham.    University-  -      566 
To  Henry  Clay.    Montpellier,  March  13,  1832           -            -            -  -      566 
Correspondence  with  the  Virginia  National  Republican  State  Conven- 
tion     ..-----•          566, 567 
Resolutions  concerning  his  public  services       ....      506 
To  Charles  J.  Faulkner,  President  of  the  Convention.   Montpellier,  July 

26,  1832 567 

Acknowledgments.    Prosperity  of  U.  S.  -  -  -  -      567 

To  Henry  Clay.     Montpellier,  April  2,  1833  -  -  -  -       567 

•  See  "  General  Index."    Tit.  "  Commercial  Resolutions." 


CONTENTS    OF    VOL.    IV.  jvji 

PAGE 

Appendix  II.— Continued. 
C.'s  speech  on  the  bill  modifying  the  tariff.    Anodyne.    Surplus  rev- 
enue.   Apprehended  difficulty  and  suggested  alleviation  of  it.  Pos- 
sible assimilation  of  employment  of  labor  in  the  South  to  its  em- 
ployment in  the  North.     Torch  of  discord  bequeathed  by  Conven- 
tion of  S.  Carolina.     Insidious  exhibitions  of  a  permanent  incom- 
patability,  and  even  hostility  of  interests  between  the  South  and 
the  North.    Nullification  and  Secession.    Horrors  of  the  gulf.    The 
deluded  and  the  deluders.     Personal  ....      5(53 

To  Aaron  Vail.    February  3,  1834   -  -  -  -  -  -      568 

Autographic  specimen  for  the  Princess  Victoria  ...      568 

Extract  from  Mr.  Madison's  will         .....      559 


WORKS  OF  MADISON. 


LETTERS,    ETC. 


TO   RICHARD    D.    CUTTS. 

Montpellier,  Jan?  4th,  1829. 

Your  letter,  my  dear  Richard,  gave  me  much  pleasure,  as  it 
shews  that  you  love  your  studies,  which  you  would  not  do  if  you 
did  not  profit  by  them.  Go  on,  my  good  boy,  as  you  have  be- 
gun ;  and  you  will  find  that  you  have  chosen  the  best  road  to  a 
happy  life,  because  a  useful  one;  the  more  happy,  because  it  will 
add  to  the  happiness  of  your  parents,  and  of  all  who  love  you 
and  are  anxious  to  see  you  deserving  to  be  loved. 

When  I  was  at  an  age  which  will  soon  be  yours,  a  book  fell 
into  my  hands,  which  I  read,  as  I  believe,  with  particular  ad- 
vantage. I  have  always  thought  it  the  best  that  had  been  writ- 
ten for  cherishing  in  young  minds  a  desire  of  improvement,  a 
taste  for  learning,  and  a  lively  sense  of  the  duties,  the  virtues, 
and  the  proprieties  of  life.  The  work  I  speak  of  is  the  "  Spec- 
tator," well  known  by  that  title.  It  had  several  authors,  at  the 
head  of  them  Mr.  Addison,  whose  papers  are  marked  at  the 
bottom  of  each  by  one  of  the  letters  in  the  name  of  the  muse 
CLIO.  They  will  reward  you  for  a  second  reading  after 
reading  them  along  with  the  others. 

Addison  was  of  the  first  rank  among  the  fine  writers  of  the 
age,  and  has  given  a  definition  of  what  he  shewed  himself  to  be 
an  example. 
vol.  iv.  1 


2  WORKS    OF    MAD  IF  ON.  1829. 

"Fine  writing,"  he  says,  "  consists  of  sentiments  that  are  nat- 
ural without  being  obvious;"  to  which  adding  the  remark  of 
Swift,  another  celebrated  author  of  the  same  period,  making  a 
good  style  to  consist  "of proper  words  in  their  proper  placi 
a  definition  is  formed  which  will  merit  your  recollection,  when 
you  become  qualified,  as  I  hope  you  will  one  day  be,  to  employ 
your  pen  for  the  benefit  of  others,  and  for  your  own  reputation. 

I  send  you  a  copy  of  the  "  Spectator,"  that  it  may  be  at  hand 
when  the  time  arrives  for  making  use  of  it;  and  as  a  token,  also, 
of  the  good  wishes  of  your  affectionate  uncle. 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    CABELL. 

Montpellieb,  January  ">.  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  yours  of  December  28,  in  which 
you  wish  me  to  say  something  on  the  agitated  subject  of  the 
basis  of  representation  in  the  contemplated  convention  for  re- 
vising the  State  Constitution.  In  a  case  depending  so  much  on 
local  views  and  feelings,  and  perhaps  on  the  opinions  of  leading 
individuals,  and  in  which  a  mixture  of  compromises  with  ab- 
stract principles  may  be  resorted  to,  your  judgment,  formed  on 
the  theatre  affording  the  best  means  of  information,  must  be 
more  capable  of  aiding  mine  than  mine  yours. 

What  occurs  to  me  is,  that  the  great  principle  "that  men 
cannot  be  justly  bound  by  laws,  in  making  which  they  have  no 
share,"  consecrated  as  it  is  by  our  Revolution  and  the  Bill  of 
Rights,  and  sanctioned  by  examples  around  us,  is  so  engraven 
on  the  public  mind  here,  that  it  ought  to  have  a  prepondera- 
ting influence  in  all  questions  involved  in  the  mode  of  forming 
a  convention,  and  in  discharging  the  trust  committed  to  it  when 
formed.  It  is  said  that  west  of  the  Blue  Ridge  tin1  votes  of 
non-freeholders  arc  often  connived  at.  the  candidates  finding  it 
unpopular  to  object  to  them. 

With  respect  to  the  slaves,  the}"  cannot  be  admitted  as  /»  r- 
sons  into  the  representation,  and  probably  will  not  be  allowed 
any  claim  as  a  privileged  property.     As  the  difficulty  and  dis- 


1829.  LETTERS.  3 

quietudes  on  that  subject  arise  mainly  from  the  great  inequality 
of  slaves  in  the  geographical  division  of  the  country,  it  is  for- 
tunate that  the  cause  will  abate  as  they  become  more  diffused, 
which  is  already  taking  place;  transfers  of  them  from  the  quar- 
ters where  they  abound,  to  those  where  labourers  are  more 
wanted,  being  a  matter  of  course. 

Is  there,  then,  to  be  no  constitutional  provision  for  the  rights 
of  property,  when  added  to  the  personal  rights  of  the  holders, 
against  the  will  of  a  majority  having  little  or  no  direct  interest 
in  the  rights  of  property?  If  any  such  provision  be  attainable 
beyond  the  moral  influence  which  property  adds  to  political 
rights,  it  will  be  most  secure  and  permanent  if  made  by  a  con- 
vention chosen  by  a  general  suffrage,  and  more  likely  to  be  so 
made  now  than  at  a  future  stage  of  population.  If  made  by  a 
freehold  convention  in  favour  of  freeholders,  it  would  be  less 
likely  to  be  acquiesced  in  permanently. 

I  received  your  letter  when  I  was  much  engaged  in  other 
matters,  and  am  still  so  in  a  degree  that  obliges  me  to  be  very 
brief.  I  know  not,  however,  that  with  more  leisure  I  could  do 
more  than  add  to  what  I  have  said  developments  and  applica- 
tions which  will  readily  occur  to  yourself,  should  your  general 
view  of  the  subject  accord  with  mine,  which  I  am  sufficiently 
aware  may  not  be  the  case. 


to  w.  c.  RIVES. 

Montpellier,  January  10,  1S29. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  favor  of  the  31st  ult.  was  duly  received. 
You  have  not  mistaken  my  idea  of  the  constitutional  power  of 
Congress  to  regulate  trade;  and  it  gives  me  pleasure  that  you 
take  the  same  view  of  it. 

The  power  to  regulate  trade  is  a  compound  technical  phrase, 
to  be  expounded  by  the  sense  in  which  it  has  been  usually 
taken,  as  shewn  by  the  purposes  to  which  it  has  been  usually 
applied.  To  interpret  it  with  a  literal  strictness,  excluding 
whatever  is  not  specified,  would  exclude  even  the  retaliating 


4  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

and  extorting  power  against  the  unequal  policy  of  other  na- 
tions,  which  is  not  specified,  yet  is  admit  tod  by  all  to  be  in- 
cluded. The  custom-house  has,  in  fact,  been  more  generally 
used  as  the  instrument  for  establishing  and  protecting  domes- 
tic manufactures,  than  for  enforcing  liberality  or  reciprocity 
abroad. 

You  make  a  very  pertinent  enquiry  as  to  the  object  and  his- 
tory of  the  publication  in  1801  subscribed  "The  danger  not 
over."  A  lapse  of  nearly  thirty  years  would  account  for  fail- 
ures of  a  memory  more  tenacious  than  mine.  I  have  certainly 
no  recollections  favoring  the  supposition  that  it  referred  to  any 
questions  then  agitated  concerning  the  constitutional  power  of 
Congress  to  encourage  manufactures  by  regulations  of  trade, 
and  must  believe  that  the  passage  grew  out  of  the  broad  and 
ductile  rules  of  construction  advanced  at  an  earlier  period  by 
Mr.  Hamilton  on  that  and  other  subjects,  and  to  hypothetical 
abuses  of  the  power,  not  less  oppressive  than  usurpation.  The 
language  of  Mr.  Pendleton  shows  that  his  ideas  were  neither 
very  definite  nor  very  positive. 

On  what  authority*  it  is  given  out  that  Mr.  Jefferson  and 
myself  were  associated  in  the  preparation  of  the  piece,  I  cannot 
divine.  For  myself,  I  hold  it  to  be  impossible.  I  do  not  re- 
member even  more  than  that  it  excited  much  attention  as  com- 
ing from  such  a  source.  The  spirit  and  style  would  denote  the 
pen  of  Mr.  Pendleton,  and  of  him  singly.  It  is  possible  that 
Mr.  Jefferson,  in  corresponding  with  him,  might,  at  that  crisis, 
have  exhorted  him  to  take  up  that  weapon  in  order  to  kill  the 
snake,  which  had  perhaps  been  skotched  only;  and  that,  not 
doubting  my  political  sentiments,  he  might  have  alluded  to  me, 
in  known  friendship  with  Mr.  Pendleton,  as  sure  to  have  the 
same  wish  with  himself.  I  have  looked  over  all  my  correspond- 
ence of  that  period  with  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  others  with  whom 
it  was  constant  and  confidential,  without  finding  a  ray  of  light. 

*  See  Richmond  Enquirer  of ,  in  the  winter  of  29-'30.  for  a  certified  proof 

that  neither  Mr.  Jefferson  nor  J.  M.  had  any  connexion  with  the  paper  of  Mr. 
Pendleton.  Mr.  Ritchie  was  misled  by  his  friend,  who  acknowledged  that  he  had 
misapprehended  his  informer. 


1829.  LETTERS.  5 

If  Mi*.  Pendleton  wrote  in  communion  with  any  one,  my  con- 
jecture would  point  to  his  kinsman  and  eleve,  Col.  J.  Taylor, 
with  whom  he  was  always  very  intimate,  and  who  had  almosl 
an  antipathy  to  Federal  powers.  It  is  much  more  probable 
that  he  concurred  in  all  the  opinions  expressed  by  Mr.  Pendle- 
ton than  that  both  Mr.  Jefferson  and  myself  should  have  done 
so  in  some  of  them.  I  will  renew  the  search  into  my  files,  and 
if  I  make  any  discovery  will  let  you  know  it. 

The  authority  of  Col.  Hamilton,  I  observe,  is  cited  against 
the  power  in  question.  If  his  language  in  the  Federalist  was 
so  intended,  which  is  not  probable,  he  must  have  changed  his 
opinion  at  a  very  early  day,  as  is  proved  by  his  official  reports, 
which  go  into  the  opposite  extreme.  Such  a  change,  if  real, 
would  not,  indeed,  be  without  his  own  example.  In  the  Fede- 
ralist, he  had  so  explained  the  removal  from  office  as  to  deny 
the  power  to  the  President.  In  an  edition  of  the  work  at  New 
York,  there  was  a  marginal  note  to  the  passage  that  "  Mr.  H. 
had  changed  his  view  of  the  Constitution  on  that  point." 

Mrs.  Rives  being  now  with  you,  Mrs.  Madison  joins  in  the 
offer  of  cordial  regards  and  good  wishes  to  you  both. 

I  must  ask  an  excuse  for  the  marks  of  haste,  which  I  could 
not  avoid  without  losing  a  mail. 


TO    RICHARD   RUSH. 

Montpellier,  Jan?  17,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  very  kind  letter  of  the 
10th.  The  commendations  you  bestow  on  those  relating  to  the 
Tariff,  belong  rather  to  what  so  pregnant  and  important  a  sub- 
ject ought  to  have  made  them,  than  to  what  they  are.  They 
were  written  to  a  friend  who  wished  to  avail  himself  of  the 
presumed  result  of  my  better  opportunities  of  elucidating  the 
question,  and  whom  I  considered  as  needing  such  an  outline 
only  of  topics  and  references  as  might  be  filled  up  by  the  re- 
searches, developments,  and  reflections  of  which  he  was  himself 


G  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

very  capable.  T  may  mention  that  though  the  letters  were 
finally  published  with  my  assent,  it  was  given  with  an  under- 
standing that  such  a  use  was  not  to  be  made  of  them  until  the 
presidential  Btruggle  should  be  over,  and  with  it  the  possibility 
of  a  misconstruction  that  might  impute  inconsistency  to  the 
writer,  and  defeat  any  good  tendency  the  publication  might 
otherwise  have. 

That  there  should  be  a  difference  of  opinion  on  the  policy  of 
legislative  encouragement  in  any  form  to  manufacturing  indus- 
try, was  to  be  expected.  But  that  a  constitutional  power  to 
encourage  it  through  the  custom-house  should  at  this  day  be 
denied,  was  what  I  certainly  had  not  anticipated.  Nor  was  I 
less  surprised  at  the  rapid  growth  than  at  the  birthplace  of  the 
doctrine  that  would  convert  the  Federal  Government  into  a 
mere  league,  which  would  quickly  throw  the  States  back  into  a 
chaos,  out  of  which,  not  order  a  second  time,  but  lasting  disor- 
ders of  the  worst  kind,  could  not  fail  to  grow.  There  are.  how- 
ever, such  excellent  talents  and  so  much  of  personal  worth 
mingled  with  these  aberrations,  that  we  may  hope  they  will  not 
be  of  long  continuance.  Opinions  whose  only  root  is  in  the 
passions,  must  wither  as  the  subsiding  of  these  withdraws  the 
necessary  pabulum. 

It  affords  us  great  pleasure  to  have  the  pledge  from  Mrs. 
Rush  that  we  are  not  to  be  finally  disappointed  of  the  visit  so 
long  expected.  In  the  meantime,  and  at  all  times,  be  assured 
of  our  affectionate  regards  and  all  our  best  wishes. 


TO  w.  c.  RIVES. 

Moxtpellier,  January  23,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received,  under  your  cover,  the  newspaper 
containing  the  explanatory  remarks*  on  the  two  letters  rela- 

.  *  A  communication,  to  the  Richmond  Enquirer,  written  by  W.  C.  R.,  under  the 
signature  of  "  A  Jackson  man  of  the  School  of  '98,"  in  defence  of  .Mr  Madison, 
who  had  been  assailed  by  that  paper  for  his  letters  to  Mr.  Cabell  on  the  consti- 
tutionality of  a  protective  tariff. 


1829.  LETTERS.  7 

ting  to  the  power  of  Congress  to  encourage  domestic  manufac- 
tures. 

The  writer  of  the  letters  is  laid  under  great  obligation  by  the 
opportune  and  apposite  interposition  in  their  behalf.  The 
strange  misconstructions  which  continue  to  be  put  on  the  occa- 
sion and  object  of  the  letters  would  produce  surprise  if  such 
effects  of  party  and  other  feelings  were  less  familiarized  to  us. 

I  am  truly  sorry  to  observe  the  persevering  and  exulting  ap- 
peals to  the  letter  of  Mr.  Jefferson  to  Mr.  Giles.  The  incon- 
sistency is  monstrous  between  the  professed  veneration  for  his 
name  and  the  anxiety  to  make  him  avow  opinions  in  the  most 
pointed  opposition  to  those  maintained  by  him  in  his  more  de- 
liberate correspondence  with  others,  and  acted  on  through  his 
whole  official  life. 

I  cannot  particularly  refer  to  his  letters  to  Austin  and  others, 
but  have  consulted  his  elaborate  report  in  1793,  when  Secretary 
of  State,  on  the  foreign  commerce  of  the  United  States,  and  all 
his  messages  when  President;  and  I  find  in  them  the  most  ex- 
plicit and  reiterated  sanctions  given  to  the  power  to  regulate 
trade  or  commerce  in  favour  of  manufactures,  by  recommending 
the  expediency  of  exercising  the  power  for  that  purpose,  as  well 
as  for  others  distinct  or  derogating  from  the  object  of  revenue. 
Having  noted  the  pages  in  the  State  Papers,  published  by 
Wait,  as  I  examined  them  with  an  eye  to  Mr.  Jefferson's  opin- 
ions, I  refer  to  them  in  the  margin*  as  abridging  a  research,  if 
your  curiosity  should  at  any  time  prompt  one. 

*  State  Papers,  vol.  i,  p.  443,  4,  5,  and  seq.,  reciprocity,  &c;  favour  manufac- 
tures ;  Report  of  Mr.  Jefferson  ;  See  MS.  Report  on  Fisheries ;  Niles,  Jan.  17, 
1829  ;  Ritchie,  and  others  ;  vol.  iv,  page  324,  "  to  encourage  agriculture  ;  "  page 
332,  "  agriculture,  manufactures,  commerce,  and  navigation,  may  be  protected 
against  casual  embarrassments." 

Vol.  iv,  page  449,  Not  too  much  regulation  ;  meet  inequalities  in  foreign  inter- 
course. 

453.  "  Foster  fisheries  for  navigation  and  food,  and  protect  manufactures 
adapted  to  our  circumstances  ;  these  rules  of  action  ;  true  principles  of  Consti- 
tution." 

Vol.  v,  page  31,  "  Take  a  broader  view  of  the  field  of  legislation.  Whether 
the  great  interests  of  agriculture,  manufactures,  &c,  can,  within  the  pale  of  your 


8  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

To  set  up  against  such  evidence  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  direct  and 
settled  opinions,  a  letter,  the  unstudied  and  unguarded  language 
incident  to  a  hasty  and  confidential  correspondence,  is  surely  as 
unreasonable  as  it  must  be  disrespectful  and  unfriendly  to  make 
such  a  letter,  written  under  such  circumstances,  the  basis  of  a 
charge  that  he  had,  through  so  many  years  and  on  so  many  oc- 
casions, maintained  and  acted  on  the  power  in  question,  without 
discovering  that  it  was  not  warranted  by  the  great  Charter 
which  he  had  bound  himself  by  oath  not  to  violate.  Every  rule 
of  fair  construction,  as  well  as  every  motive  of  friendly  respect, 
ought  to  favour,  as  much  as  possible,  a  meaning  in  the  letter 
that  would  reconcile  it  with  the  overwhelming  evidence  of  opin- 
ions elsewhere  avowed,  instead  of  displaying  a  self-contradic- 
tion by  turning  the  letter  against  those  opinions. 

Nor  would  a  candid  critic  be  at  any  loss  for  a  meaning  that 
would  avoid  the  self-contradiction.  The  term  "indefinitely," 
on  which  the  question  of  constitutionality  turns,  would  seem  to 
imply  that  a  definite  or  limited  use  of  the  power  might  not  be 
unconstitutional.  And  it  is  a  fair  presumption  that  the  idea  in 
the  mind  of  the  writer  was  that  an  unlimited  or  excessive  abuse 
of  the  power  was  equivalent  to  a  usurpation  of  it.  Is  it  possi- 
ble to  believe  that  Mr.  Jefferson  could  have  intended  to  admit 
that  he  had  been  all  his  life  inhaling  despotism,  and  had  then, 
for  the  first  time,  "  scented  the  tainted  breeze  ?  "  However  just 
the  distinction  may  be  between  the  abuse  and  the  usurpation  of 

constitutional  powers,  be  aided  in  any  of  their  relations,  are  questions  within  the 
limits  of  your  functions  which  will  necessarily  occupy  attention.'' 

Page  59,  "  Prohibit  exportation  of  arms  and  ammunition.'' 

458,  "  Shall  we  suppvess  the  import,  and  give  that  advantage  to  foreign  over 
domestic  manufactures?" 

489,  "  Etablishments  of  internal  manufactures,  <fcc,  formed  and  forming,  will 
under,  &c.,  and  protecting  duties  and  prohibitions,  become  permanent." 

Shall  surplus  revenue  be  hoarded  or  repeated,  or  not  rather  applied  to  roads  (a) 
canals,  rivers,  education,  and  other  great  foundations  of  prosperity  and  union, 
under  powers  which  Congress  may  (b)  already  possess,  or  by  amendment  of  Con- 
stitution? 

(a)  Manufactures  omitted  as  not  on  same  footing. 

(b)  See  case  of  Rivers  and  Canals,  p.  458.  Also,  preventive  authority  in  case  of  Treason  ;  see 
vol.  v,  p.  484. 


1829.  LETTERS.  9 

power,  and  necessary  to  be  kept  in  view  in  all  accurate  discus- 
sions, it  cannot  be  denied  that  there  maybe  abuses  so  enormous 
as  to  be  not  only  at  war  with  the  Constitution,  whether  Federal 
or  State,  but  to  strike  at  the  foundation  of  the  social  compact  it- 
self, and,  if  otherwise  irremediable,  to  justify  a  dissolution  of  it. 

I  am  still  in  the  dark  as  to  the  ground  of  the  statement  that 
makes  Mr.  Jefferson  and  me  parties  to  the  publication  in  1801, 
signed  "  The  danger  not  over." 

Have  you  noticed  in  Niles's  Register  of  the  17th  instant,  page 
380,  an  extract  from  an  address  in  1808,  signed,  among  others, 
by  our  friend  Mr.  Ritchie,  wishing  Congress  to  encourage  our 
own  manufactures  by  higher  duties  on  foreign,  even  if  the  present 
attack  on  our  commerce  should  bioio  over,  that  we  may  be  the  less 
dependent  ?  etc. 

With  our  joint  salutations  to  Mrs.  Rives,  I  pray  you  to  ac- 
cept a  reassurance  of  my  great  and  cordial  esteem. 


TO   JOSEPH   C.    CABELL. 

Montpellier,  February  2,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  last  evening  yours  of  the  29th  ultimo. 
It  confirms,  I  observe,  my  fears  that  nothing  could  now  be  done 
for  the  University,  though  the  more  in  need  of  aid  in  conse- 
quence of  the  fever,  which  is  banishing  a  number  of  the  students, 
and  may  have  the  effect  of  impairing  its  income. 

The  spirit  in  which  my  letters  to  you  are  criticised  is  as  sin- 
gular as  it  is  illiberal.  The  least  degree  of  candor  would  readily 
understand  what  so  much  effort  is  employed  to  misunderstand. 
If  a  doubt  could  have  arisen  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  word 
trade,  which  happened  to  slip  from  the  pen  instead  of  the  word 
commerce,  the  doubt  ought  to  have  vanished  before  the  evidence 
furnished  by  the  whole  scope  of  the  letter,  which  has  reference 
exclusively  to  the  commerce  with  foreign  nations.  To  apply 
the  term  to  trade  between  man  and  man  within  the  jurisdiction 
of  a  particular  State,  is  such  a  violation  of  all  probability  and 


10  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

propriety,  that  it  could  not  be  dreaded  as  a  snare  for  the  weak- 
est minds,  if  we  did  not  sec  strong  ones  decoyed  by  party  spirit 
into  such  as  arc  not  less  obvious. 

To  regard  the  omitted  words  "common  defence  and  general 
welfare"  as  what  would  have  limited  the  meaning  of  the  quota- 
tion, is,  if  possible,  still  more  extraordinary.  Had  they  been 
added  without  a  precautionary  explanation,  they  would  have 
been  a  line  treat  for  hungry  critics.  The  quotation  which  in- 
cludes imposts  and  duties  among  the  revenue  powers,  and  the 
remarks  founded  on  that  circumstance,  were  dictated  by  the  ar- 
gument from  it,  that  a  tariff  on  commerce  could  be  imposed  for 
no  purpose  other  than  revenue.  To  meet  the  argument,  it  was 
necessary  to  show  that  the  circumstance  did  not  exclude  a  tariff 
on  commerce  for  other  purposes,  from  the  power  to  regulate 
trade,  under  which  was  claimed  the  constitutionality  of  a  tariff 
in  favour  of  manufactures,  as  of  other  objects,  such  as  munitions 
of  war,  &c,  &c,  none  of  which  could  be  favoured  by  a  tariff  on 
a  construction  exclusively  appropriating  it  to  revenue. 

What  the  extract  is  to  be,  from  Yates's  account  of  the  Con- 
vention, which  convicts  me  of  inconsistency,  I  cannot  divine. 
If  anything  stated  by  him  has  that  tendency,  it  must  be  among 
the  many  errors  in  his  crude  and  broken  notes  of  what  passed 
in  that  body.  When  I  looked  over  them  some  years  ago,  I  was 
struck  with  a  number  of  instances  in  which  he  had  totally  mis- 
taken what  was  said  by  me,  or  given  it  in  scraps  and  terms 
which,  taken  without  the  developments  or  qualifications  accom- 
panying them,  had  an  import  essentially  different  from  what 
was  intended.  Mr.  Yates  bore  the  character  of  an  honest  man, 
and  I  do  not  impute  to  him  wilful  misrepresentation.  But  be- 
sides the  fallible  and  faulty  mode  in  which  he  noted  down  what 
passed,  the  prejudices  he  felt  on  the  occasion,  with  those  of 
which  he  was  a  representative,  were  such  as  to  give  every  tinct- 
ure and  warp  to  his  mind  of  which  an  honest  one  could  be  sus- 
ceptible. It  is  to  be  recollected,  too,  that  he  was  present  during 
the  early  discussions  only,  which  were  of  a  more  loose  and  gen- 
eral cast;  having  withdrawn  to  make  his  welcome  report  before 
the  rough  materials  were  reduced  to  the  size  and  shape  proper 


1829.  LETTERS.  \\ 

for  the  contemplated  edifice.  Certain  it  is,  that  I  shall  never 
admit  his  report  as  a  test  of  my  opinions,  when  not  in  accord- 
ance with  those  which  have  been  repeatedly  explained  and  au- 
thenticated by  myself.  The  report  of  Luther  Martin  is  as  little 
to  be  relied  on  for  accuracy  and  fairness. 

I  am  sorry  to  see  the  exulting  appeals  which  continue  to  be 
made  to  the  letter  of  Mr.  Jefferson  to  Mr.  Giles,  as  evidence  of 
an  opinion  adverse  to  the  constitutionality  of  a  protecting  tariff. 
It  is  surely  a  strange  mode  of  manifesting  the  veneration  pro- 
fessed for  his  memory,  to  be  so  anxious  to  place  him  in  such 
pointed  contradiction  to  himself.  A  true  friend  ought  to  seek 
rather  for  a  meaning  in  the  letter  that  would  avoid  the  charge 
on  him  of  supporting  usurped  power  through  a  long  life,  and 
never  making  the  discovery  till  near  the  end  of  it;  he  who  had 
been  one  of  the  very  first  to  snuff  it  in  a  tainted  breeze.  Of  his 
deliberate  opinion,  officially  and  privately  maintained,  there  is 
the  fullest  proof  on  record  and  in  print.  You  will  find  it  in 
the  able  report  to  Congress  in  1793,  when  Secretary  of  State, 
and  in  his  successive  messages  to  Congress  when  President, 
published  in  Wait's  State  Papers,  as  referred  to  in  the  margin.* 
His  report  on  the  fisheries  in  1794,  equally  able  and  elaborate 
with  the  other,  is  not  there  printed,  but  is  not  less  in  point. 
His  letter  to  Mr.  Austin,  in  1816,  is  so  clear,  so  full,  and  so 
emphatical,  that  it  alone  ought  to  crush  every  attempt  to  put  the 
weight  of  his  opinion  in  the  wrong  scale;  and  such  is  the  weight 
of  it  that  it  ought  to  be  kept  in  the  rigid  one;  of  this  I  am  sure 
you  are  very  sensible. 

You  see,  my  good  friend,  that  my  disinclination  to  go  into 
the  newspapers  was  more  justified  than  you  were  disposed  to 
allow.  What  is  occurring  was  anticipated,  and  was  a  sufficient 
motive  for  wishing  to  avoid  the  dilemma  of  leaving  a  good  cause 
to  be  borne  down  by  the  persevering  efforts  of  zealous  partisans, 
or  throwing  the  defence  of  it  on  reluctant  though  adequate 
hands.     In  mine  an  "  imbelle  telum  "  only  could  now  be  wielded. 

Can  you  conveniently  ascertain  the  authority  on  which  it 

*  See  my  letter  to  Mr.  Rives,  23d  January,  1829.     [Ante,  p.  6.] 


12  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

was  stated  that  Mr.  Jefferson  and  myself  were  parties  to  the 
publication  of  Mr.  Pendleton  in  1801,  under  the  signature  of 
"The  danger  not  over." 
With  cordial  regard.  &c. 


TO    FREDERICK   LIST. 

Feb'  3,  1829. 

I  have  received,  sir,  your  letter  of  January  21,  with  the 
printed  accompaniments;  of  which  none  can  say  less  than  that 
they  contain  able  and  interesting  views  of  the  doctrine  they 
pousc.  The  more  thorough  the  examination  of  the  question 
which  relates  to  the  encouragement  of  domestic  manufactures, 
the  more  the  true  policy  (until  all  nations  make  themselves 
commercially  one  nation)  will  be  found  to  lie  between  the  ex- 
tremes of  doing  nothing  and  prescribing  everything;  between 
admitting  no  exception  to  the  rule  of  " laissez /aire"  and  con- 
verting the  exceptions  into  the  rule.  The  intermediate  Legis- 
lative interposition  ivill  be  more  or  less  limited,  according  to  the 
differing  judgments  of  Statesmen,  and  ought  to  be  so,  according 
to  the  aptitudes  or  inaptitudes  of  countries  and  situations  for 
the  particular  objects  claiming  encouragement. 

Having  found  it  convenient  to  adopt  the  rule  which  contracts 
my  subscriptions  of  every  sort,  and  for  reasons  strengthened  by 
every  day  withdrawn  from  the  scanty  and  uncertain  remnant 
of  life,  I  must  deny  myself  the  pleasure  of  adding  my  name  to 
the  list  which  patronises,  in  that  way,  the  work  you  contem- 
plate; and  which,  I  doubt  not,  will  well  repay  the  attention  of 
readers  who  set  a  due  value  on  the  subjects  to  be  investigated. 
That  your  knowledge  of  our  language  is  not  incompetent  for  the 
task  is  sufficiently  shewn  by  specimens  which  place  you  among 
the  foreigners  who  have  studied  the  idiom  of  the  country  with 
most  success. 


1829.  LETTERS.  13 


TO   JAMES   BARBOUR. 

February  6,  1829. 

DR  Sir, — I  am  glad  to  find  that  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  now- 
understood  to  be  the  mainspring  of  the  Cabinet  policy,  and, 
more  than  his  predecessors,  a  manager  of  the  public  will,  holds 
a  language  so  friendly  towards  this  country.  The  longer  a 
practice  corresponding  with  it  is  postponed,  though  not  the 
better  for  us,  the  worse  it  will  be  for  the  other  party.  I  sin- 
cerely wish,  on  every  account,  that  you  may  succeed  in  bring- 
ing about  a  satisfactory  arrangement  on  all  the  points  in  con- 
troversy between  the  two  countries,  particularly  that  of  the 
trade  with  the  West  Indies,  which,  more  than  any  other,  may 
be  an  obstacle  to  commercial  harmony.  Not  only  the  Govern- 
ment, but  the  British  shipowners,  ought  to  be  sensible  that 
nothing  can  be  gained  on  that  side  by  the  existing  prohibition 
of  direct  intercourse.  And  as  the  Eastern  States,  which  alone 
ever  questioned  our  right  to  a  reciprocity,  or  were  willing  to 
waive  it,  are  now  the  champions  for  asserting  it,  no  hope  ought 
to  be  indulged  that  the  British  monopoly  of  the  navigation  will 
ever  be  acquiesced  in.  The  present  and  prospective  depend- 
ence of  the  Islands  for  necessary  supplies  on  the  United  States, 
makes  the  period  favorable  for  pressing  on  the  Government 
hard  arguments  in  soft  words. 

It  seems  to  be  understood  that  Congress  will  hand  over  the 
most  difficult  subjects  to  their  successors;  particularly  the  tariff, 
on  -which  the  discord  between  the  South  and  the  Centre  and 
the  West  will  be  not  a  little  embarrassing,  and  require  the 
compromising  management  of  a  masterly  hand.  The  proceed- 
ings of  Georgia  and  South  Carolina  against  the  Tariff  were 
sent  to  Governor  Giles,  and  have  been  laid  before  the  Legisla- 
ture, in  the  hope  of  an  echo  of  them.  The  report  of  the  com- 
mittee to  which  they  were  referred,  if  made,  has  not  been  pub- 
lished. The  large  proportion  of  members  committed  by  their 
recorded  votes  at  the  last  session  will,  probably,  in  the  event 
of  a  direct  question,  turn  the  scale  in  the  House  of  Delegates  in 


1 4  W  0  R  K  S    0  P    If  A  I)  I  S  0  X .  1829. 

favour  of  those  proceedings.     It  is  suggested  that  the  Senate 
will  either  negative  or  postpone  the  subject. 

The  session  lias  been  almost  exclusively  occupied  with  the 
proposed  Convention  for  improving  the  Constitution  of  the 
State.  Various  plans  have  been  offered,  discussed,  amended, 
and  rejected,  as  the  basis  of  representation  in  the  Convention. 
The  prevailing  opinion,  I  believe,  is  that  the  white  population 
in  the  Senatorial  districts  will  be  the  basis,  with  a  right  of  suf- 
frage extended  to  non-freeholders. 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    CABELL. 

Montpellieh,  February  13,  1S29. 

Dear  Sir, — Since  mine  of  January  29,  I  have  received  one 
of  the  papers  of  Hampden.  But  it  is  number  2,  the  Enquirer 
containing  the  first  number,  and  a  number  from  the  fellow  pen 
having  not  come  into- the  neighbourhood.  Be  so  good,  when  at 
leisure,  to  procure  and  enclose  it  to  me. 

I  observe  that  some  stress  is  laid  on  the  reference  to  our  Co- 
lonial relations  to  Great  Britain,  as  having  originated  with  me. 
The  fact  is,  that  I  found  them  used  as  a  source  of  argument 
against  the  power  claimed  for  Congress,  in  a  speech  of  Mr. 
Alexander,  which  I  received  as  printed  in  a  pamphlet  form. 
His  object  was  to  show  that  the  power  to  regulate  commerce 
did  not  embrace  the  tariff  power,  by  the  distinction  made  be- 
tween them  in  the  revolutionary  controversy  with  Great  Britain, 
and  by  the  specific  insertion  of  "  imposts  "  on  commerce  among 
the  revenue  powers.  My  object  was  to  clear  the  way  for  my 
view  of  the  general  question,  by  removing  this  particular  error. 
Had  not  the  attention  been  called  to  that  controversy,  I  should 
not  have  noticed  it,  because  it  was  desirable  to  keep  the  subject 
as  simple  and  within  as  small  a  compass  as  possible.  For  a 
like  reason,  I  made  no  reference  to  the  "  power  to  regulate  com- 
merce among  the  several  States."  I  always  foresaw  that  diffi- 
culties misrht  be  started  in  relation  to  that  power  which  could 


1829.  LETTERS.  15 

not  be  fully  explained  without  recurring  to  views  of  it,  which, 
however  just,  might  give  birth  to  specious  though  unsound 
objections.  Being  in  the  same  terras  with  the  power  over  for- 
eign commerce,  the  same  extent,  if  taken  literally,  would  belong 
to  it.  Yet  it  is  very  certain  that  it  grew  out  of  the  abuse*  of 
the  power  by  the  importing  States  in  taxing  the  non-importing, 
and  was  intended  as  a  negative  and  preventive  provision  against 
injustice  among  the  States  themselves,  rather  than  as  a  power 
to  be  used  for  the  positive  purposes  of  the  General  Government, 
in  which  alone,  however,  the  remedial  power  could  be  lodged. 
And  it  will  be  safer  to  leave  the  power  with  this  key  to  it,  than 
to  extend  to  it  all  the  qualities  and  incidental  means  belonging 
to  the  power  over  foreign  commerce,  as  is  unavoidable,  accord- 
ing to  the  reasoning  I  see  applied  to  the  case. 

The  quotations  from  the  Virginia  Convention  prove  nothing 
but  the  poverty  of  the  cause  that  would  avail  itself  of  them.  It 
would  be  wrong  to  detract  from  the  talents  or  integrity  of  the 
opponents  of  the  Constitution.  But  their  eulogists,  in  the 
praises  bestowed  on  their  prophetic  sagacity,  seem  to  forget 
that  where  one  prediction  has  been  fulfilled,  a  hundred  have 
been  contradicted  by  the  events.  And  well  it  is  that  such  has 
been  the  case,  for  otherwise  every  calamity  involved  in  mon- 
archy, aristocracy,  oligarchy,  and  military  and  fiscal  oppression, 
would,  ere  this,  have  been  the  lot  of  our  country. 

I  hope  Lloyd's  Debates  of  the  First  Session  of  the  First  Con- 
gress, on  the  subject  of  commerce  and  revenue,  will  be  fully 
used  in  case  the  tariff  should  be  brought  up  by  the  report  of 
the  Committee  of  the  House  of  Delegates  on  the  Georgia  and 
South  Carolina  resolutions.  The  debates  contain  the  most  am- 
ple proof  that  manufactures  were  as  much  an  object  as  revenue; 
that  the  encouragement  of  them  aimed  at  was  by  regulations 
diminishing  and  even  preventing  revenue,  as  well  as  producing 
it;  that  such  regulations  previously  existed  in  particular  States, 
and  were  looked  for  from  the  new  Congress;  that  the  power  was 
not  questioned  by  a  single  member,  and  that  the  use  of  it  was 

*  See  Federalist,  No.  42. 


10  WORK'S     OF     MADISON.  1829. 

expressly  proposed,  not  only  by  Northern  members,  but  partic- 
ularly by  those  from  Virginia  and  South  Carolina,  to  the  extent 
not  only  of  imposts,  but  prohibitions. 


TO   N.    P.    TRIST. 

Montpelliek,  Mar.  1,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  favor  of  the  24th  ult.  was  received  by  the 
mail  of  Thursday  last.  The  copies  of  Mr.  Monroe's  paper  had 
been  just  before  forwarded  to  Mr.  Johnson  and  Mr.  Cabell;  and 
I  sent  to  Mr.  Randolph  by  the  earliest  mail  the  copies  of  Mr. 
Jefferson's  letters  to  the  senior  Mr.  Adams,  and  to  myself 
having  previously  adverted  to  the  passages  [of  which]  you 
wished  to  have  my  consideration.  The  word  " species"  last 
repeated  I  found  to  be  preceded  by  the  word  "only"  in  the 
original  letter  to  me;  and  the  restoration  of  it  seeming  to  im- 
prove the  expression,  I  did  not  insert  the  word  "itself"  as  a 
substitute  for  the  repetition.  It  appeared  to  me,  as  [to]  you, 
that  a  fastidious  criticism  only  would  notice  the  passages  which 
speak  of  pamphlets;  and  as  a  literal  consistency  results  from 
the  order  of  dates,  I  did  not  suggest  any  change.  I  took  the 
liberty,  however,  of  inviting  the  attention  of  Mr.  Randolph  to 
the  charges — one  implied,  the  other  express — against  Col.  Ham- 
ilton, the  nature  of  which  made  it  probable  that  proofs  would 
be  called  for  by  those  who  watch  over  his  fame,  observing,  that 
if  these  could  not  be  readily  given,  an  anticipation  of  the  call 
might  have  a  just  influence  on  the  question  of  publishing  the 
charges.  I  annexed  also  a  marginal  "qucre"  to  the  sentence 
which  contrasts  the  disciplined  policy  of  New  England  in  party 
votings  with  the  less  artful  course  of  the  Southern  people. 

We  arc  thankful  for  your  careful  attention  to  the  letter  you 
kindly  took  charge  of.     It  was  safely  received. 

Had  the  style  of  criticism  on  the  letters  to  Mr.  Cabell  been 
suspected,  much  trouble  might  have  been  saved  to  the  pen  and 
the  press.  A  very  few  words  ex  abundanti  cautela  would  have 
obviated  the  effect  of  brevity.     But  we  must  not  look  to  the 


1829.  LETTERS.  17 

misunderstanding  of  the  text  for  the  strain  of  the  comment 
on  it. 

I  have  glanced  at  the  papers  sketching  the  views  you  mean 
to  take  of  two  important  subjects.  That  they  admit  and  de- 
serve elucidation  cannot  be  doubted.  But  some  care  in  dis- 
cussing the  question  of  a  distinction  between  literal  and  con- 
structive meanings  may  be  necessary  in  order  to  avoid  the  dan- 
ger of  a  verbal  character  to  the  discussion.  The  best  aids  in 
investigating  the  true  scope  of  "contracts,"  a  violation  of  which 
is  prohibited  by  the  Constitution,  will  be  found  where  you  in- 
tend to  look  for  them.  I  wish  I  could  abridge  your  researches. 
The  Federalist  touches  on  the  origin  of  the  prohibition;  but  my 
copy  not  being  at  home,  I  cannot  refer  to  the  passage.  The 
debates  in  the  State  Conventions  would  seem  to  promise  much 
information,  but  I  am  not  sure  that  such  will  be  the  case.  The 
cotemporary  state  of  things  will  be  the  best  resource,  if  the 
publications  exhibiting  it  can  be  met  with.  They  arc  numerous 
in  pamphlet  form  and  in  newspapers.  But  I  am  unable  to  make 
any  specific  references  that  would  be  useful  to  you,  and  I  am 
sorry  for  it. 


TO   SAMUEL   KERCHEVAL. 

Montpellier,  Sepr  7,  1829. 

I  have  received,  sir,  your  letter  of  August  27,  and  thank  you 
for  the  little  pamphlet  containing  Mr.  Jefferson's  letters  to  you, 
which  I  did  not  before  possess  in  that  convenient  form.  In 
reply  to  your  request,  the  infirm  state  of  my  health,  with  par- 
ticular claims  at  present  on  my  time,  obliges  me  to  say  that  on 
the  points  in  which  I  do  not  exactly  concur  with  Mr.  Jefferson, 
I  could  offer  nothing  beyond  opinions  without  the  proper  expla- 
nations, which  would  not  be  either  sufficiently  respectful  to  the 
subject  or  worthy  of  your  acceptance. 

vol.  iv.  2 


18  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

Outline. 

September,  1829. 

The  compound  Government  of  tlic  United  States  is  without  a 
model,  and  to  be  explained  by  itself,  not  by  similitudes  or  anal- 
ogies. The  terms  Union,  Federal,  National,  oughl  not  to  be 
applied  to  it  without  the  qualifications  peculiar  to  the  system. 
The  English  Government  is  in  a  great  measure  sui  gem  ris,  and 
the  terms  Monarchy,  used  by  those  who  look  at  the  executive 
head  only,  and  Commonwealth,  by  those  looking  at  the  repre- 
sentative member  chiefly,  are  inapplicable  in  a  Btricl  sense. 

A  fundamental  error  lies  in  supposing  the  State  governments 
to  be  the  parties  to  the  constitutional  compact  from  which  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  results. 

It  is  a  like  error  that  makes  the  General  Government  and 
the  State  governments  the  parties  to  the  compact,  as  stated  in 
the  fourth  letter  of"  Algernon  Sidney,"  [Judge  Roane.]  They 
may  be  parties  in  a  judicial  controversy,  but  are  not  so  in  rela- 
tion to  the  original  constitutional  compact. 

In  No.  XI  of  "  Retrospects,"  [by  Gov.  Giles.]  in  the  Rich- 
mond Enquirer  of  Sept.  8,  1829,  Mr.  Jefferson  is  misconstrued, 
or,  rather,  misstated,  as  making  the  State  governments  and  the 
Government  of  the  United  Slates  foreign  to  each  oilier;  the 
evident  meaning,  or,  rather,  the  express  language  of  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son being,  "the  States  are  foreign  to  each  other,  in  the  portions 
of  sovereignty  not  granted,  as  they  were  in  the  entire  sover- 
eignty before  the  grant,"  and  not  that  the  State  governments 
and  the  Government  of  the  United  States  are  foreign  to  each 
other.  As  the  State  governments  participate  in  appointing  the 
functionaries  of  the  General  Government,  it  can  no  more  be  said 
that  they  are  altogether  foreign  to  each  other,  than  that  the 
people  of  a  State  and  its  government  are  foreign. 

The  real  parties  to  the  constitutional  compact  of  the  United 
States  are  the  States — that  is,  the  people  thereof  respectively  in 
their  sovereign  character,  and  they  alone,  so  declared  in  the 
resolutions  of  1798,  and  so  explained  in  the  report  of  1799.  In 
these  resolutions,  as  originally  proposed,  the  word  alone,  which 


18:9.  OUT  LINK.  19 

guarded  against  error  on  this  point,  was  struck  out,  [see  printed 
debates  of  1798,]  and  led  to  misconceptions  and  misreasoningg 
concerning  the  true  character  of  the  political  system,  and  to 
the  idea  that  it  was  a  compact  between  the  governments  of  the 
States  and  the  Government  of  the  United  States;  an  idea  pro- 
moted by  the  familiar  one  applied  to  governments  independent 
of  the  people,  particularly  the  British,  of  [?]  a  compact  between 
the  monarch  and  his  subjects,  pledging  protection  on  one  side 
and  allegiance  on  the  other. 

The  plain  fact  of  the  case  is,  that  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  was  created  by  the  people  composing  the  respect- 
ive States,  who  alone  had  the  right;  that  they  organized  the 
Government  into  Legislative,  Executive,  and  Judiciary  depart- 
ments, delegating  thereto  certain  portions  of  power  to  be  exer- 
cised over  the  whole,  and  reserving  the  other  portions  to  them- 
selves respectively.  As  these  distinct  portions  of  power  were 
to  be  exercised  by  the  General  Government  and  by  the  State 
governments,  by  each  within  limited  spheres;  and  as,  of  course, 
controversies  concerning  the  boundaries  of  their  power  would 
happen,  it  was  provided  that  they  should  be  decided  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  so  constituted  as  to  be  as 
impartial  as  it  could  be  made  by  the  mode  of  appointment  and 
responsibility  for  the  judges. 

Is  there,  then,  no  remedy  for  usurpations  in  which  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States  concur?  Yes:  constitutional 
remedies,  such  as  have  been  found  effectual,  particularly  in  the 
case  of  the  alien  and  sedition  laws,  and  such  as  will  in  all  cases 
be  effectual,  while  the  responsibility  of  the  General  Government 
to  its  constituents  continues:  remonstrances  and  instructions; 
recurring  elections  and  impeachments;  amendment  of  Constitu- 
tion, as  provided  by  itself,  and  exemplified  in  the  11th  article 
limiting  the  suability  of  the  States. 

These  are  resources  of  the  States  against  the  General  Gov- 
ernment, resulting  from  the  relations  of  the  States  to  that  Gov- 
ernment, while  no  corresponding  control  exists  in  the  General 
to  the  individual  governments,  all  of  whose  functionaries  are 


20  W  0  i:  K  S    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

independent  of  the  United  States  in  tlicir  appointment  and  re- 
sponsibility. 

Finally,  should  all  the  constitutional  remedies  fail,  and  the 
usurpations  of  the  General  Government  become  so  intolerable 
as  absolutely  to  forbid  a  longer  passive  obedience  and  non-re- 
sistence,  a  resort  to  the  original  rights  of  the  parties  becomes 
justifiable,  and  redress  may  be  sought  by  shaking  off  the  yoke, 
as  of  right  might  be  done  by  part  of  an  individual  State  in  a 
like  case,  or  even  by  a  single  citizen,  could  he  effect  it,  if  de- 
prived of  rights  absolutely  essential  to  his  safety  and  happiness. 
In  the  defect  of  their  ability  to  resist,  the  individual  citizen 
may  seek  relief  in  expatriation  or  voluntary  exile,*  a  resort  not 
within  the  reach  of  large  portions  of  the  community. 

In  all  the  views  that  may  be  taken  of  questions  between  the 
State  governments  and  the  General  Government,  the  awful 
consequences  of  a  final  rupture  and  dissolution  of  the  Union 
should  never  for  a  moment  be  lost  sight  of.  Such  a  prospect 
must  be  deprecated,  must  be  shuddered  at  by  every  friend  to 
his  country,  to  liberty,  to  the  happiness  of  man.  For,  in  the 
event  of  a  dissolution  of  the  Union,  an  impossibility  of  ever  re- 
newing it  is  brought  home  to  every  mind  by  the  difficulties  en- 
countered in  establishing  it.  The  propensity  of  all  communities 
to  divide,  when  not  pressed  into  a  unity  by  external  danger,  is 
a  truth  well  understood.  There  is  no  instance  of  a  people  in- 
habiting even  a  small  island,  if  remote  from  foreign  danger,  and 
sometimes  in  spite  of  that  pressure,  who  are  not  divided  into 
alien,  rival,  hostile  tribes.  The  happy  Union  of  these  States  is 
a  wonder;  their  Constitution  a  miracle;  their  example  the  hope 
of  Liberty  throughout  the  world.  Woe  to  the  ambition  that 
would  meditate  the  destruction  of  either! 

*  See  letter  to  N.  P.  Trist;  and  see  also  the  distinction  between  an  expatriating 
individual  withdrawing  only  his  person  and  movable  effects,  and  the  withdrawal 
of  a  State  mutilating  the  domain  of  the  Union. 


1829.  NOTES   ON   SUFFRAGE.  21 

Notes  on  Suffrage,*  written  at  different  periods  after  his  retire- 
ment from  public  life. 

I. 

As  appointments  for  the  General  Government  here  contem- 
plated! will  in  part  be  made  by  the  State  governments,  all  the 
citizens,  in  States  where  the  right  of  suffrage  is  not  limited  to 
the  holders  of  property,  will  have  an  indirect  share  of  represen- 
tation in  the  General  Government.  But  this  docs  not  satisfy 
the  fundamental  principle  that  men  cannot  be  justly  bound  by 
laws  in  making  which  they  have  no  part.  Persons  and  prop- 
erty being  both  essential  objects  of  government,  the  most  that 
either  can  claim  is  such  a  structure  of  it  as  will  leave  a  reason- 
able security  for  the  other.  And  the  most  obvious  provision 
of  this  double  character  seems  to  be  that  of  confining  to  the 
holders  of  property  the  object  deemed  least  secure  in  popular 
governments,  the  right  of  suffrage  for  one  of  the  two  legislative 
branches.  This  is  not  without  example  among  us,  as  well  as 
other  constitutional  modifications,  favouring  the  influence  of 
property  in  the  Government.  But  the  United  States  have  not 
reached  the  stage  of  society  in  which  conflicting  feelings  of  the 
class  with,  and  the  class  without  property,  have  the  operation 
natural  to  them  in  countries  fully  peopled.  The  most  difficult 
of  all  political  arrangements  is  that  of  so  adjusting  the  claims 
of  the  two  classes  as  to  give  security  to  each  and  to  promote 
the  welfare  of  all.  The  Federal  principle,  which  enlarges  the 
sphere  of  power  without  departing  from  the  elective  basis  of  it, 
and  controls  in  various  ways  the  propensity  in  small  Republics 
to  rash  measures,  and  the  facility  of  forming  and  executing 
them,  will  be  found  the  best  expedient  yet  tried  for  solving  the 
problem. 

II. 

These  observations  (in  the  speech  of  James  Madison,  see  De- 

*  See  Debates  of  the  Federal  Convention,  vol.  Ill,  p.  1253,  where  Mr.  M.  indi- 
cated a  preference  for  freehold  suffrage, 
t  Referring  to  his  speech  in  the  Convention  of  1787. — Ed. 


OJ  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

bati.s  in  the  Convention  of  1787,  Augusl  7)  do  not  convey  the 
speaker's  more  full  and  matured  view  of  the  subject,  which  is 
subjoined.  He  felt  too  much  at  the  time  the  example  of  Vir- 
ginia. 

The  right  of  suffrage  is  a  fundamental  article  in  republican 
constitutions.  The  regulation  of  it  is,  at  the  same  time,  a  task 
of  peculiar  delicacy.  Allow  the  right  exclusively  to  property, 
and  the  rights  of  persons  may  be  oppressed.  The  feudal  polity 
alone  sufficiently  proves  it.  Extend  it  equally  to  all,  and  the 
rights  of  property  or  the  claims  of  justice  may  be  overruled  by 
a  majority  without  property  or  interested  in  measures  of  injus- 
tice. Of  this  abundant  proof  is  afforded  by  oilier  popular  gov- 
ernments, and  is  not  without  examples  in  our  own,  particularly 
in  the  laws  impairing  the  obligation  of  contracts. 

In  civilized  communities,  property  as  well  as  personal  rights 
is  an  essential  object  of  the  laws,  which  encourage  industry  by 
securing  the  enjoyment  of  its  fruits;  that  industry  from  which 
property  results,  and  that  enjoyment  which  consists  not  merely 
in  its  immediate  use,  but  in  its  posthumous  destination  to  objects 
of  choice,  and  of  kindred  or  affection. 

In  a  just  and  a  free  Government,  therefore,  the  rights  both 
of  property  and  of  persons  ought  to  be  effectually  guarded. 
Will  the  former  be  so  in  case  of  a  universal  and  equal  Buffrage? 
Will  the  latter  be  so  in  case  of  a  suffrage  confined  to  the  hold- 
ers of  property  ? 

As  the  holders  of  property  have  at  stake  all  the  other  rights 
common  to  those  without  property,  they  may  be  the  more  re- 
strained from  infringing,  as  well  as  the  less  tempted  to  infringe, 
the  rights  of  the  latter.  It  is  nevertheless  certain,  that  there 
are  various  ways  in  which  the  rich  may  oppress  the  poor;  in 
which  property  may  oppress  liberty;  and  that  the  world  is  filled 
with  examples.  It  is  necessary  that  the  poor  should  have  a  de- 
fence against  the  danger. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  danger  to  the  holders  of  property  can- 
not be  disguised,  if  they  be  undefended  against  a  majority  with- 
out property.  Bodies  of  men  are  not  less  swayed  by  interesl 
than  individuals,  and  are  less  controlled  by  the  dread  of  re- 


1829.  NOTES   ON   SUFFRAGE.  26 

proacli  and  the  other  motives  felt  by  individuals.  Hence  the 
liability  of  the  rights  of  property,  and  of  the  impartiality  of 
laws  affecting  it,  to  be  violated  by  legislative  majorities  having 
an  interest,  real  or  supposed,  in  the  injustice.  Hence  agrarian 
laws  and  other  levelling  schemes.  Hence  the  cancelling  or  eva- 
ding of  debts,  and  other  violations  of  contracts.  We  must  not 
shut  our  eyes  to  the  nature  of  man,  nor  to  the  light  of  experi- 
ence. Who  would  rely  on  a  fair  decision  from  three  individuals 
if  two  had  an  interest  in  the  case  opposed  to  the  rights  of  the 
third  ?  Make  the  number  as  great  as  you  please,  the  impar- 
tiality will  not  be  increased,  nor  any  farther  security  against 
injustice  be  obtained,  than  what  may  result  from  the  greater 
difficulty  of  uniting  the  wills  of  a  greater  number.  In  all  Gov- 
ernments there  is  a  power  which  is  capable  of  oppressive  exer- 
cise. In  monarchies  and  aristocracies,  oppression  proceeds  from 
a  want  of  sympathy  and  responsibility  in  the  Government  to- 
wards the  people.  In  popular  Governments  the  danger  lies  in 
an  undue  sympathy  among  individuals  composing  a  majority, 
and  a  want  of  responsibility  in  the  majority  to  the  minority. 
The  characteristic  excellence  of  the  political  system  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  arises  from  a  distribution  and  organization  of  its 
powers,  which,  at  the  same  time  that  they  secure  the  dependence 
of  the  Government  on  the  will  of  the  nation,  provide  better 
guards  than  are  found  in  any  other  popular  Government  against 
interested  combinations  of  a  majority  against  the  rights  of  a 
minority. 

The  United  States  have  a  precious  advantage  also  in  the  ac- 
tual distribution  of  property,  particularly  the  landed  property, 
and  in  the  universal  hope  of  acquiring  property.  This  latter 
peculiarity  is  among  the  happiest  contrasts  in  their  situation  to 
that  of  the  Old  World,  where  no  anticipated  change  in  this  re- 
spect can  generally  inspire  a  like  sympathy  with  the  rights  of 
property.  There  may  be  at  present  a  majority  of  the  nation 
who  are  even  freeholders,  or  the  heirs  and  aspirants  to  free- 
holds; and  the  day  may  not  be  very  near  when  such  will  cease 
to  make  up  a  majority  of  the  community.  But  they  cannot  al- 
ways so  continue.     With  every  admissible  subdivision  of  the 


24  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

arable  [land,]  a  populousness  not  greater  than  that  of  England 
or  France  will  reduce  the  holders  to  a  minority.  And  whenever 
the  majority  Bhall  be  without  landed  or  other  equivalent  prop- 
erty, and  without  the  means  or  hope  of  acquiring  it,  what  is  to 
secure  the  rights  of  property  against  the  danger  of  an  equality 
and  universality  of  suffrage,  vesting  complete  power  over  prop- 
erty in  hands  without  a  share  in  it;  not  to  speak  of  danger  in 
the  mean  time  from  a  dependence  of  an  increasing  number  on 
the  wealth  of  a  few?  In  other  countries,  this  dependence  re- 
sults in  some  from  the  relations  between  landlords  and  tenants; 
in  others,  both  from  that  source  and  from  the  relations  between 
wealthy  capitalists  and  indigent  labourers.  In  the  United  States 
the  occurrence  must  happen  from  the  last  source;  from  the  con- 
nexion between  the  great  capitalists  in  manufactures  and  com- 
merce, and  the  numbers  employed  by  them.  Nor  will  accumula- 
tions of  capital  for  a  certain  time  be  precluded  by  our  laws  of 
descent  and  distribution;  such  being  the  enterprise  inspired  by 
free  institutions,  that  great  wealth  in  the  hands  of  individuals 
and  associations  may  not  be  unfrequcnt.  But  it  may  be  ob- 
served, that  the  opportunities  may  be  diminished  and  the  per- 
manency defeated  by  the  equalizing  tendency  of  the  laws. 

No  free  country  has  ever  been  without  parties,  which  are  a 
natural  offspring  of  freedom.  An  obvious  and  permanent  divis- 
ion of  every  people  is  into  the  owners  of  the  soil  and  the  other 
inhabitants.  In  a  certain  sense  the  country  may  be  said  to  be- 
long to  the  former.  If  each  landholder  has  an  exclusive  prop- 
erty in  his  share,  the  body  of  landholders  have  an  exclusive 
property  in  the  whole.  As  the  soil  becomes  subdivided,  and 
actually  cultivated  by  the  owners,  this  view  of  the  subject  de- 
rives force  from  the  principle  of  natural  law,  which  vests  in 
individuals  an  exclusive  right  to  the  portions  of  ground  with 
which  they  have  incorporated  their  labour  and  improvements. 
Whatever  may  be  the  rights  of  others,  derived  from  their  birth 
in  the  country;  from  their  interest  in  the  highways  ami  other 
parcels  left  open  for  common  use,  as  well  as  in  the  national 
edifices  and  monuments;  from  their  share  in  the  public  defence, 
and  from  their  concurrent  support  of  the  Government,  it  would 


1829.  NOTES   ON   SUFFRAGE.  25 

seem  unreasonable  to  extend  the  right  so  far  as  to  give  them, 
when  become  the  majority,  a  power  of  legislation  over  the 
landed  property  without  the  consent  of  the  proprietors.  Some 
shield  against  the  invasion  of  their  rights  would  not  be  out  of 
place  in  a  just  and  provident  system  of  Government.  The  prin- 
ciple of  such  an  arrangement  has  prevailed  in  all  Governments 
where  peculiar  privileges  or  interests  held  by  a  part  were  to  be 
secured  against  violation,  and  in  the  various  associations  where 
pecuniary  or  other  property  forms  the  stake.  In  the  former 
case  a  defensive  right  has  been  allowed;  and,  if  the  arrangement 
be  wrong,  it  is  not  in  the  defence,  but  in  the  kind  of  privilege 
to  be  defended.  In  the  latter  case,  the  shares  of  suffrage  allotted 
to  individuals  have  been  with  acknowledged  justice  apportioned 
more  or  less  to  their  respective  interests  in  the  common  stock. 
These  reflections  suggest  the  expediency  of  such  a  modifica- 
tion of  Government  as  would  give  security  to  the  part  of  the 
society  having  most  at  stake  and  being  most  exposed  to  danger. 
Three  modifications  present  themselves. 

1.  Confining  the  right  of  suffrage  to  freeholders  and  to  such 
as  hold  an  equivalent  property,  convertible,  of  course,  into  free- 
holds. The  objection  to  this  regulation  is  obvious.  It  violates 
the  vital  principle  of  free  Government,  that  those  who  are  to 
be  bound  by  laws  ought  to  have  a  voice  in  making  them.  And 
the  violation  would  be  strikingly  more  unjust  as  the  lawmakers 
became  the  minority.  The  regulation  would  be  as  unpropitious 
also  as  it  would  be  unjust.  It  would  engage  the  numerical  and 
physical  force  in  a  constant  struggle  against  the  public  author- 
ity, unless  kept  down  by  a  standing  army,  fatal  to  all  parties. 

2.  Confining  the  right  of  suffrage  for  one  branch  to  the  holder 
of  property,  and  for  the  other  branch  to  those  without  property. 
This  arrangement,  which  would  give  a  mutual  defence  where 
there  might  be  mutual  danger  of  encroachment,  has  an  aspect 
of  equality  and  fairness.  But  it  would  not  be,  in  fact,  either 
equal  or  fair,  because  the  rights  to  be  defended  would  be  un- 
equal, being  on  one  side  those  of  property  as  well  as  of  persons, 
and  on  the  other  those  of  persons  only.     The  temptation  also 


S»fc  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

to  encroach,  though  in  a  certain  degree  mutual,  would  be  felt 
more  strongly  on  one  side  than  on  the  other.  It  would  be  more 
likely  to  beget  an  abuse  of  the  legislative  negative  in  extorting 
concessions  at  the  expense  of  propriety  [property?]  than  the 
reverse.  The  division  of  the  State  into  two  classes,  with  dis- 
tinct and  independent  organs  of  power,  and  without  any  inter- 
mingled agency  whatever,  might  lead  to  contests  and  antipa- 
thies not  dissimilar  to  those  between  the  patricians  and  plebe- 
ians at  Rome. 

3.  Confining  the  right  of  electing  one  branch  of  the  Legisla- 
ture to  freeholders,  and  admitting  all  others  to  a  common  right 
with  holders  of  property  in  electing  the  other  branch.  This 
would  give  a  defensive  power  to  holders  of  property,  and  to  the 
class  also  without  property,  when  becoming  a  majority  of  elect- 
ors, without  depriving  them,  in  the  meantime,  of  a  participation 
in  the  public  councils.  If  the  holders  of  property  would  thus 
have  a  twofold  share  of  representation,  they  would  have  at  the 
same  time  a  twofold  stake  in  it,  the  rights  of  property  as  well 
as  of  persons,  the  twofold  object  of  political  institutions.  And 
if  no  exact  and  safe  equilibrium  can  be  introduced,  it  is  more 
reasonable  that  a  preponderating  weight  should  be  allowed  to 
the  greater  interest  than  to  the  lesser.  Experience  alone  can 
decide  how  far  the  practice  in  this  case  would  accord  with  the 
theory.  Such  a  distribution  of  the  right  of  suffrage  was  tried 
in  New  York,  and  has  been  abandoned,  whether  from  experi- 
enced evils  or  party  calculations  may  possibly  be  a  question. 
It  is  still  on  trial  in  North  Carolina,  with  what  practical  indi- 
cations is  not  known.  It  is  certain  that  the  trial,  to  be  satis- 
factory, ought  to  be  continued  for  no  inconsiderable  period, 
until,  in  fact,  the  non-freeholders  should  be  the  majority. 

4.  Should  experience  or  public  opinion  require  an  equal  and 
universal  suffrage  for  each  branch  of  the  Government,  such  as 
prevails  generally  in  the  United  States,  a  resource  favourable 
to  the  rights  of  landed  and  other  property,  when  its  possessors 
become  the  minority,  may  be  found  in  an  enlargement  of  the 
election  districts  for  one  branch  of  the  Legislature,  and  a  pro- 


1829.  NOTES   ON   SUFFRAGE.  27 

longation  of  its  period  of  service.  Large  districts  are  mani- 
festly favourable  to  the  election  of  persons  of  general  respecta- 
bility and  of  probable  attachment  to  the  rights  of  property, 
over  competitors  depending  on  the  personal  solicitations  prac- 
ticable on  a  contracted  theatre.  And  although  an  ambitious 
candidate  of  personal  distinction  might  occasionally  recommend 
himself  to  popular  choice  by  espousing  a  popular  though  unjust 
object,  it  might  rarely  happen  to  many  districts  at  the  same 
time.  The  tendency  of  a  longer  period  of  service  would  be  to 
render  the  body  more  stable  in  its  policy,  and  more  capable  of 
stemming  popular  currents  taking  a  wrong  direction,  till  reason 
and  justice  could  regain  their  ascendancy. 

5.  Should  even  such  a  modification  as  the  last  be  deemed  in- 
admissible, and  universal  suffrage  and  very  short  periods  of 
election  within  contracted  spheres  be  required  for  each  branch 
of  the  Government,  the  security  for  the  holders  of  property, 
when  the  minority,  can  only  be  derived  from  the  ordinary  influ- 
ence possessed  by  property,  and  the  superior  information  inci- 
dent to  its  holders,  from  the  popular  sense  of  justice,  enlight- 
ened and  enlarged  by  a  diffusive  education,  and  from  the  diffi- 
culty of  combining  and  effectuating  unjust  purposes  throughout 
an  extensive  country;  a  difficulty  essentially  distinguishing  the 
United  States,  and  even  most  of  the  individual  States,  from  the 
small  communities  where  a  mistaken  interest  or  contagious  pas- 
sion could  readily  unite  a  majority  of  the  whole  under  a  fac- 
tious leader,  in  trampling  on  the  rights  of  the  minor  party. 

Under  every  view  of  the  subject,  it  seems  indispensable  that 
the  mass  of  citizens  should  not  be  without  a  voice  in  making 
the  laws  which  they  are  to  obey,  and  in  choosing  the  magis- 
trates who  are  to  administer  them.  And  if  the  only  alternative 
be  between  an  equal  and  universal  right  of  suffrage  for  each 
branch  of  the  Government,  and  a  confinement  of  the  entire 
right  to  a  part  of  the  citizens,  it  is  better  that  those  having  the 
greater  interest  at  stake,  namely,  that  of  property  and  persons 
both,  should  be  deprived  of  half  their  share  in  the  Government, 
than  that  those  having  the  lesser  interest,  that  of  personal 
rights  only,  should  be  deprived  of  the  whole. 


28  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

Ill* 

The  right  of  suffrage  being  of  vital  importance,  and  approv- 
ing an  extension  of  it  to  housekeepers  and  heads  of  families,  I 
will  suggest  a  few  considerations  which  govern  my  judgment 
on  the  subject. 

Were  the  Constitution  on  hand  to  be  adapted  to  the  present 
circumstances  of  our  country,  without  taking  into  view  the 
changes  which  time  is  rapidly  producing,  an  unlimited  exten- 
sion of  the  right  would  probably  vary  little  the  character  of 
our  public  councils  or  measures.  But  as  we  are  to  prepare  a 
system  of  government  for  a  period  which  it  is  hoped  will  be  a 
long  one,  we  must  look  to  the  prospective  changes  in  the  condi- 
tion and  composition  of  the  society  on  which  it  is  to  act. 

It  is  a  law  of  nature,  now  well  understood,  that  the  earth 
under  a  civilized  cultivation  is  capable  of  yielding  subsistence 
for  a  large  surplus  of  consumers  beyond  those  having  an  imme- 
diate interest  in  the  soil;  a  surplus  which  must  increase  with 
the  increasing  improvements  in  agriculture,  and  the  labour- 
saving  arts  applied  to  it.  And  it  is  a  lot  of  humanity,  that  of 
this  surplus  a  large  proportion  is  necessarily  reduced  by  a  com- 
petition for  employment  to  wages  which  afford  them  the  bare 
necessaries  of  life.  The  proportion  being  without  property,  or 
the  hope  of  acquiring  it,  cannot  be  expected  to  sympathize  suffi- 
ciently with  its  rights  to  be  safe  depositories  of  power  over 
them. 

What  is  to  be  done  with  this  unfavoured  class  of  the  com- 
munity ?  If  it  be,  on  one  hand,  unsafe  to  admit  them  to  a  full 
share  of  political  power,  it  must  be  recollected,  on  the  other, 
that  it  cannot  be  expedient  to  rest  a  republican  government  on 
a  portion  of  the  society  having  a  numerical  and  physical  force 
excluded  from,  and  liable  to  be  turned  against  it,  and  which 
would  lead  to  a  standing  military  force,  dangerous  to  all  parties 
and  to  liberty  itself.  This  view  of  the  subject  makes  it  proper 
to  embrace  in  the  partnership  of  power  every  description  of  citi- 

*  Written  during  the  session  of  the  Virginia  Convention  of  lS29-'30. — Rl 


1829.  NOTES    ON    SUFFRAGE.  29 

zens  having  a  sufficient  stake  in  the  public  order  and  the  stable 
administration  of  the  laws,  and  particularly  the  housekeepers 
and  heads  of  families,  most  of  whom,  "  having  given  hostages  to 
fortune,"  will  have  given  them  to  their  country  also. 

This  portion  of  the  community,  added  to  those  who,  although 
not  possessed  of  a  share  of  the  soil,  are  deeply  interested  in 
other  species  of  property,  and  both  of  them  added  to  the  territo- 
rial proprietors,  who  in  a  certain  sense  may  be  regarded  as  the 
owners  of  the  country  itself,  form  the  safest  basis  of  free  govern- 
ment. To  the  security  for  such  a  government,  afforded  by  these 
combined  members,  may  be  farther  added  the  political  and 
moral  influence  emanating  from  the  actual  possession  of  author- 
ity, and  a  just  and  beneficial  exercise  of  it. 

It  would  be  happy  if  a  state  of  society  could  be  found  or 
framed  in  which  an  equal  voice  in  making  the  laws  might  be 
allowed  to  every  individual  bound  to  obey  them.  But  this  is  a 
theory  which,  like  most  theories,  confessedly  requires  limita- 
tions and  modifications.  And  the  only  question  to  be  decided 
in  this,  as  in  other  cases,  turns  on  the  particular  degree  of  de- 
parture in  practice  required  by  the  essence  and  object  of  the 
theory  itself. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  a  crowded  state  of  population, 
of  which  we  have  no  example  here,  and  which  we  know  only  by 
the  image  reflected  from  examples  elsewhere,  is  too  remote  to 
claim  attention. 

The  ratio  of  increase  in  the  United  States  [makes  it  probable] 
that  the  present  12  millions  will  in  25  years  be  24  millions. 
24        "  50      "  48 

48        "  75      "  96 

96        "  100      "        192 

There  may  be  a  gradual  decrease  of  the  ratio  of  increase,  but 
it  will  be  small  as  long  as  the  agriculture  shall  yield  its  abund- 
ance. Great  Britain  has  doubled  her  population  in  the  last 
fifty  years,  notwithstanding  its  amount  in  proportion  to  its  ter- 
ritory at  the  commencement  of  that  period;  and  Ireland  is  a 
much  stronger  proof  of  the  effect  of  an  increasing  product  of 
food  in  multiplying  the  consumers. 


30  W  ORKS    0  V    M  ADIS  0  N .  1S29. 

How  far  this  view  of  (lie  subject  will  be  affected  by  the  repub- 
lican laws  of  descent  and  distribution,  in  equalizing  the  property 
of  the  citizens  and  in  reducing  to  the  minimum  mutual  surpluses 
for  mutual  supplies,  cannot  be  inferred  from  any  direct  and  ade- 
quate experiment.  One  result  would  seem  to  be  a  deficiency  of 
the  capital  for  the  expensive  establishments  which  facilitate  la- 
bour and  cheapen  its  products  on  one  hand;  and  on  the  other, 
of  the  capacity  to  purchase  the  costly  and  ornamental  articles 
consumed  by  the  wealthy  alone,  who  must  cease  to  be  idlers 
and  become  labourers.  Another,  the  increased  mass  of  labour- 
ers added  to  the  production  of  necessaries  by  the  withdrawal 
for  this  object,  of  a  part  of  those  now  employed  in  producing 
luxuries,  and  the  addition  to  the  labourers  from  the  class  of 
present  consumers  of  luxuries.  To  the  effect  of  these  changes, 
intellectual,  moral,  and  social,  the  institutions  and  laws  of  the 
country  must  be  adapted;  and  it  will  require  for  the  task  all 
the  wisdom  of  the  wisest  patriots. 

Supposing  the  estimate  of  the  growing  population  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  to  be  nearly  correct,  and  the  extent  of  their  territory 
to  be  eight  or  nine  hundred  millions  of  acres,  and  one-fourth  of 
it  to  consist  of  arable  surface,  there  will,  in  a  century  or  a  little 
more,  be  nearly  as  crowded  a  population  in  the  United  States 
as  in  Great  Britain  or  France;  and  if  the  present  Constitution, 
(of  Virginia,)  with  all  its  flaws,  has  lasted  more  than  half  a  cen- 
tury, it  is  not  an  unreasonable  hope  that  an  amended  one  will 
last,  more  than  a  century. 

If  these  observations  be  just,  every  mind  will  be  able  to  de- 
velop and  apply  them. 


TO   SAMUEL   S.   LEWIS,   PRESIDENT,   ETC. 

Fbb*  16,  1829. 
DR  Sir, — Your  communication  of  the  3d  instant  having  pro- 
ceeded, by  mistake,  to  Montpelicr  in  Vermont,  was  not  received 
till  yesterday. 

My  lengthened  observation  making  me  more  and  more  sensi 


1829.  LETTERS.  31 

ble  of  the  essential  connexion  between  a  diffusion  of  knowledge 
and  the  success  of  Republican  institutions,  I  derive  pleasure 
from  every  example  of  such  associations  as  that  of  the  "  Wash- 
ington College  Parthenon."  With  my  best  wishes  that  its  use- 
fulness may  equal  the  laudable  views  which  led  to  it,  I  tender 
my  acknowledgements  for  the  honorary  membership  conferred 
on  me.  At  my  advanced  period  of  life  these  wishes  and  ac- 
knowledgments are  the  only  proofs  I  have  to  give  of  the  value 
I  put  on  the  mark  of  respect  shown  me;  and  the  sincerity  of 
them  the  only  value  that  can  entitle  them  to  a  favorable  accept- 
ance by  the  Society. 


TO  J.   Q.   ADAMS. 

Montpfllier,  Feb?  24,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received,  in  your  kind  letter  of  the  21st 
instant,  the  little  pamphlet  containing  the  correspondence  be- 
tween yourself  and  "several  citizens  of  Massachusetts,"  with 
"  certain  additional  papers." 

The  subjects  presented  to  view  by  the  pamphlet  will,  doubt- 
less, not  be  overlooked  in  the  history  of  our  country.  The  doc- 
uments not  previously  published  are  of  a  very  interesting  cast. 
The  letter  of  Governor  Plumer,  particularly,  if  nowise  impaired 
by  adverse  authority,  must  receive  a  very  marked  attention  and 
have  a  powerful  effect. 

As  what  relates  to  Col.  Hamilton,  however,  is  stated  on  a 
solitary  information  only.  I  cannot  but  think  there  may  be  some 
material  error  at  the  bottom  of  it.  That  the  leading  agency 
of  such  a  man,  and  from  a  State  in  the  position  of  New  York, 
should,  in  a  project  for  severing  the  Union,  be  anxiously  wished 
for  by  its  authors,  is  not  to  be  doubted;  and  an  experimental 
invitation  of  him  to  attend  a  select  meeting  may,  without  diffi- 
culty, be  supposed.  But  obvious  considerations  oppose  a  belief 
that  such  an  invitation  would  be  accepted;  and  if  accepted,  the 
supposition  would  remain,  that  his  intention  might  be  to  dis- 


32  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

suade  his  party  and  personal  friends  from  a  con-piracy  as  rash 
as  wicked,  and  as  ruinous  to  the  party  itself  as  to  the  country. 
The  lapse  of  time  must  have  extinguished  lights  by  which  alone 
the  truth,  in  many  cases,  could  be  fully  ascertained.  It  is  quite 
possible  that  this  may  be  an  exception. 


TO   BENJAMIN   WATERHOUSE. 

Montpeluer,  Mar.  12,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  in  due  time,  with  your  favor  of  14th 
ult.,  a  copy  of  your  Inaugural  Discourse,  prepared  in  early 
life.  I  was  not  at  leisure,  till  within  a  few  days,  to  give  it  a 
perusal,  and  ought  not  now  to  hazard  a  critique  on  the  merits 
of  its  Latinity.  If  I  were  ever  in  any  degree  qualified  for  such 
a  task,  a  recollection  of  my  long  separation  from  classical 
studies  would  arrest  my  pen.  I  am  safe,  I  believe,  in  the  re- 
mark that  the  language  has  less  the  aspect  of  being  moulded  in 
a  modern  idiom  than  has  been  generally  the  case  with  the  per- 
formances of  modern  Latinists. 

Another  interview,  which  you  despair  of,  would  give  me  as 
much  pleasure  as  it  could  you.  The  possibility  of  it  must  lie 
with  you,  as  the  junior  party.  We  should  certainly  be  at  no 
loss  for  topics,  having  lived  through  a  long  period  filled  with 
events,  as  novel  as  various,  and  as  interesting  as  novel.  Our 
conversation  would  of  course  embrace  the  scenes*  you  glance 
at,  from  which  corners  of  the  veil  are  already  lifted.  You 
probably  know  much  of  them  that  I  do  not,  and  both  of  us  less 
than  others  whose  testimony  has  passed  beyond  the  summons 
even  of  History. t  It  might  have  been  well  if  the  truth  yet  in 
preservation  could  have  instructed  posterity  without  disturbing 

*  The  conduct  of  the  opponents  of  the  Administration  in  the  E.  States  during 
the  war. 

t  Mr.  John  Adams,  Mr.  Gerry,  Governor  Sullivan,  and  Dr.  Eustis,  are  named 
in  the  letter  of  Dr.  Waterhouse,  and  are  probably  among  the  witnesses  referred 
to  by  Mr.  Madison. 


1823.  LETTERS.  33 

the  present  generation.  This  seems  now  to  have  become  im- 
possible; and  the  sufferers  will  know  on  whom  to  charge  the 
misfortune. 


TO   JOHN   Q.    ADAMS. 

March  13,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  1st  (post- 
marked the  7th)  instant,  inclosing  copies  of  two  letters  from 
you  to  Mr.  Bacon  in  1808,  one  bearing  date  Nov1  17,  the  other 
Decr  21st. 

You  ask  the  favor  of  me  to  compare  these  letters  with  the 
narrative  in  that  of  Mr.  Jefferson  [to  Mr.  Giles]  of  December 
25,  1825,  and  to  let  you  know  whether  they  were  seen  by  me 
shortly  after  they  were  received;  with  a  further  request  that  I 
would  state  whether  any  other  circumstances  known  to  me  at 
the  time,  and  now  remembered,  may  serve  to  rectify  either  Mr. 
Jefferson's  memory  concerning  those  occurrences  or  your  own. 

Aware,  as  I  am,  of  the  fallibility  of  memories  more  tenacious 
than  mine,  I  cannot  venture,  after  so  long  an  interval,  to  say 
positively  whether  the  letters  were  or  were  not  seen  by  me; 
being  unable  to  distinguish  sufficiently  between  impressions 
which  might  be  derived  either  from  a  sight  of  the  letters,  or 
from  a  verbal  communication  of  their  contents. 

The  substance  of  my  recollections  on  the  subject  is,  that  in 
conversations  at  an  interview  with  Mr.  Bacon  and  one  of  his 
colleagues,  during  the  session  of  Congress  commencing  in  No- 
vember, 1808,  the  deep  discontents  and  menacing  crisis  pro- 
duced by  the  Embargo  in  the  Eastern  quarter  were  pressed  by 
them  with  much  anxiety,  as  calling  for  a  substitution  of  some 
other  measure;  and  that  information  and  opinions  of  a  likeness 
to  those  conveyed  in  the  two  letters  were  referred  to  as  re- 
ceived from  you,  and  dwelt  upon  as  entitled  to  the  greatest 
weight  on  the  occasion. 

It  does  not  seem  difficult  to  account  for  the  anachronisms 
into  which  Mr.  Jefferson  might  have  fallen.     The  confidential 

vol.  iv.  3 


•>_{.  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829 

interview  with  you  having  made  the  more  vivid  impression, 
subsequent  informations  of  a  kindred  hearing  might  in  the 
lapse  of  time  lose  their  distinction  of  dates,  and  finally  be  re- 
ferred to  the  same  origin.  There  are  few  memories  which 
under  like  circumstances  might  not  in  that  way  be  misled. 

I  return  the  two  copies,  as  you  desire,  and  pray  you  to  be 
reassured  of  my  high  esteem,  and  to  accept  my  cordial  saluta- 
tions. 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    CABELL. 

Makch  in.  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  by  the  last  mail  your  favor  of  the 
13th,  with  a  copy  of  the  pamphlet  containing  the  two  supple- 
mental letters  of  Mr.  Jefferson.  They  are  as  much  in  point  as 
words  could  make  them.  But  his  authority  is  made  to  weigh 
nothing,  or  outweigh  everything,  according  to  the  scale  in  which 
it  is  put.  It  would  be  well  if  the  two  letters,  at  least,  could 
find  their  way  into  the  newspapers  which  circulate  most  the 
poison  for  which  they  are  an  antidote. 

I  have  been  prevented  from  sooner  thanking  you  for  your 
communications  at  the  close  of  the  session,  and  particularly  for 
the  several  numbers  of  the  Norfolk  Herald,  by  a  constant  em- 
ployment, occasioned  by  successive  occurrences.  Two  of  the 
numbers  of  Hampden  were  in  Enquirers  which  came  to  hand, 
and  one  was  in  an  Enquirer  which  never  reached  the  neighbour- 
hood. They  have  the  merit  of  ingenuity;  but  it  smacks  rather 
of  the  Bar  than  smells  of  the  lamp.  I  have  never  been  able  to 
look  over  the  number  you  last  sent  till  within  a  few  days,  nor 
the  others  with  more  than  a  slight  attention.  I  will  return 
them,  as  you  request,  unless  you  have  no  occasion  for  the  num- 
ber in  the  lost  Enquirer,  ami  that  also,  if  you  wish  it.  I  have 
been  almost  tempted,  by  the  gross  misstatements,  the  strange 
misconstructions,  and  the  sophistical  comments  applied  to  my 
letters  to  you,  to  sketch  a  few  explanatory  remarks  on  topics 
which  were  left  for  your  development,  and  on  passages   the 


1829.  LETTERS.  35 

brevity  of  which  has  been  urged  for  such  ample  abuse  of  criti- 
cism, and  such  malign  inferences.  But  I  foresaw  that  whatever 
the  explanations  might  be,  they  would  produce  fresh  torrents 
of  deceptive  and  declamatory  matter,  which,  if  not  answered, 
might  be  trumpeted  as  unanswerable;  and  if  answered,  might 
tend  to  a  polemic  series  as  interminable  as  the  fund  of  words 
and  the  disposition  to  abuse  them  is  inexhaustible.  A  silent 
appeal  to  a  cool  and  candid  judgment  of  the  public  may,  per- 
haps, serve  the  cause  of  truth. 

I  am  truly  sorry  for  the  trouble  to  which  you  have  been  put 
in  the  case,  notwithstanding  your  willingness  in  taking  it;  and 
still  more  for  the  indisposition  which  has  not  yet  been  subdued. 

I  hope  you  will  not  think  it  necessary  to  say  anything  rela- 
tive to  the  course  you  pursued  on  the  Convention  question.  I 
have  no  doubt  of  the  purity  of  your  views,  which  your  speech 
shews  were  very  ably  supported. 

I  have  not  heard  for  some  days  from  the  malady  at  the  Uni- 
versity, which  has  thrown  such  a  cloud  on  its  prospects.  I  hope 
the  worst  is  over  there,  but  it  is  difficult  to  say  what  may  be 
the  duration  of  the  effect  on  public  opinion,  produced  by  the  in- 
discretion of  friends  and  the  workings  of  foes.  The  Faculty  wish 
an  examination  and  report  on  the  whole  case,  by  persons  prop- 
erly selected  for  the  purpose.  I  have  given  my  sanction  to  the 
measure;  but  there  is,  I  fear,  some  difficulty  in  bringing  it 
about.     I  wrote  near  a  month  ago  to  General  C  on  the 

subject,  who,  I  suspect,  was  then,  and  may  yet  be,  in  the  lower 
country.  I  have  just  received  from  our  Minister  in  London 
and  from  Professor  Long,  letters  on  the  subject  of  a  successor 
to  the  latter.  Mr.  B.  is  doing  all  he  can  for  us,  but  without 
any  encouraging  prospects.  Mr.  Long  is  pretty  decided  that 
we  ought  not  to  rely  on  any  successor  from  England,  and  is 
equally  so  that  Doctor  Harrison  will  answer  our  purpose  better 
than  any  one  attainable  abroad.  He  appears  to  be  quite  san- 
guine on  this  point.  He  intimates,  confidentially,  I  suppose, 
what  I  did  not  before  know,  that  Dr.  Harrison  is  himself  de- 
sirous of  having  his  temporary  appointment  made  permanent.  I 
have  received  a  letter  from  Mr.  Quincy,  now  President  of  Har- 


36  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

vard  University,  expressing  a  wish  to  procure  a  full  account  of 
the  origin,  the  progress,  and  arrangement  of  ours,  including 
particularly  what  may  have  any  reference  to  Theological  in- 
struction; and  requesting  that  he  may  be  referred  to  the  proper 
source  of  all  the  printed  documents,  that  he  may  know  where 
to  apply  for  them.  Can  a  set  of  copies  be  had  in  Richmond, 
and  of  whom?  Mr.  Quincy  is  so  anxious  on  the  subject  that  he 
was  on  his  way  to  the  University,  when  the  report  of  the  fever 
stopped  him.  The  answer  given  to  your  enquiry  concerning 
the  publication  of  Judge  Pendleton,  signed  the  "Danger  not 
over,"  was  very  imperfect.  The  authority  of  Mr.  Pollard  should 
have  been  disclosed.  I  still  think  the  statement  of  a  partner- 
ship destitute  of  foundation;  my  files  are  perfectly  silent,  and  I 
learn  that  Mr.  Jefferson's  contain  no  correspondence  with  Mr. 
Pendleton  on  the  subject.  It  is  possible  that  something  may 
have  passed  indirectly  through  Col.  Taylor  bearing  on  the 
case;  but  if  so,  it  was  probably  not  of  a  nature  to  make  Mr. 
JeiFerson  a  party  in  any  sense  to  the  particular  contents  of  the 
paper. 

I  cannot  conclude  without  expressing  my  regret  at  the  trouble 
brought  on  you  by  our  mutual  attempt  to  vindicate  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  against  misinterpretation,  and  my 
concern  at  the  unfavorable  account  of  your  health.  Accept  my 
best  wishes  that  this  may  be  soon  and  effectually  restored,  and 
the  reassurance  I  offer  of  my  affectionate  esteem. 


TO    WILLIAM   MADISON,    CHAIRMAN,   &C. 

Mojjtpellier,  March  25,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  the  communication  of  the  Dele- 
gates from  the  counties  composing  this  Senatorial  District,*  as- 
sembled for  the  purpose  of  recommending  four  persons  to  repre- 
sent it  in  the  Convention  which  is  to  propose  amendments  to 
the  Constitution  of  the  State,  acquainting  me  that  I  have  been 

*  The  counties  of  Spottsylvania,  Louisa,  Orange,  and  Madison,  in  Virginia. 


1829.  LETTERS.  37 

included  in  the  number  selected,  and  expressing  a  wish  io  be  in- 
formed whether  the  Delegation  has  my  assent  to  their  makiDg 
it  known  to  the  people  of  the  district  that,  if  elected,  I  will  obey 
the  call  to  the  service  assigned  me. 

Although  aware  of  the  considerations  which,  at  my  age,  with 
the  infirmities  incident  to  it,  might  dissuade  me  from  assuming 
such  a  trust,  I  retain  too  deep  a  sense  of  what  I  owe  for  past 
and  repeated  marks  of  confidence  and  favor,  to  my  native  State, 
and  particularly  to  this  portion  of  it,  not  to  join  my  efforts, 
however  feeble,  in  the  important  work  to  be  performed,  should 
such  be  the  will  of  the  district. 

In  that  event  I  shall  carry  into  the  Convention  every  dispo- 
sition not  to  lose  sight  of  the  interest  and  feelings  of  the  dis- 
trict; whilst  availing  myself  of  the  lights  afforded  by  the  free 
and  calm  discussions  becoming  such  a  body,  and  yielding  to  that 
spirit  of  compromise  to  which  the  foresight  of  the  Delegation 
has  so  appropriately  alluded. 

I  offer  to  the  Delegation  the  expression  of  my  sincere  and 
great  respect. 


TO    BENJAMIN   ROMAINE. 

Montpellier,  Ap1  14,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  favor  of  March  30th,  ac- 
companied by  two  sets  of  pamphlets,  for  which  I  tender  my 
thanks.  That  which  relates  to  the  views  of  a  particular  party 
during  the  period  from  1803  to  the  close  of  the  last  war  neces- 
sarily invites  the  recollections  of  the  agents  and  observers  of 
public  affairs,  among  whom  both  of  us  are  numbered.  On  the 
other  subject,  that  of  Constitutional  Reforms,  the  lights  of  ex- 
perience, such  as  you  impart,  must  always  merit  attention,  and 
it  will  be  well  for  the  States  who  are  latest  in  performing  the 
task  not  to  lose  sight  of  the  advantage  which  that  circumstance 
gives  them.  There  is  a  pretty  general  concurrence  here  as  to 
the  chief  defects  in  the  Constitution  which  is  about  to  be  re- 
vised.    I  wish  there  may  be  an  equal  one  in  the  proper  reme- 


38  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

dies.  I  hope,  at  least,  that  everything  tending  to  undermine 
the  general  Constitution  will  be  avoided  with  flic  same  care 
which  guards  against  encroachments  on  the  reserved  authori- 
ties of  the  States. 

Mrs.  Madison  did  not  need  a  memento  of  her  former  acquaint- 
ance with  you,  though  she  had  forgotten  her  observation,  whether 
just  or  not,  which  is  retained  by  your  better  recollections.  She 
joins  me  in  friendly  respects,  and  in  all  the  good  wishes,  which 
I  pray  you  to  accept. 


TO    ELLIOTT    CRESSON. — FOR    HIS    ALBUM. 

AntiL  23.  1829. 

With  the  examples  before  me,  and  as  a  token  of  my  esteem 
and  good  wishes  for  Elliott  Cresson,  I  take  pleasure  in  com- 
plying with  his  request,  by  the  following  sample  of  my  hand- 
writing: 

Liberty  and  Learning;  both  best  supported  when  leaning 
each  on  the  other. 


TO   JONATHAN   LEONARD. 

Montpellier,  Ap'  28,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  yours  of  the  10th  instant, 
with  a  copy  of  "the  History  of  Dedham."  Though  more  imme- 
diately interesting  to  those  locally  and  personally  related  to 
the  subjects  of  it,  the  work  contains  much  that  is  generally  at- 
tractive. This  may  be  said  more  especially  of  the  minute  care 
with  which  the  author  exhibits  the  example  of  a  civil  society  in 
its  primary  formation,  and  spontaneous  organization;  and  the 
like  example  of  an  ecclesiastical  society,  self-constituted  and 
self-governed.  We  are  here,  as  you  appear  to  know,  about  to 
undertake,  not  the  creation  of  a  political  union,  but  the  revisal 
of  an  existing  Constitution.*     Its  defects  are  generally  admit- 

*  Virginia  Convention. 


1829.  LETTERS.  39 

ted,  but  there  will  probably  be  some  disagreement  as  to  the 
best  remedies  for  them. 

Be  pleased  to  accept  my  thanks  for  the  favor  done  me;  and, 
taking  for  granted  that  it  comes  from  an  old  acquaintance  in 
public  life,  I  offer  at  the  same  time  my  friendly  recollections 
and  my  good  wishes. 


TO    BARON   DE    NEUVILLE. 

June  15,  1829. 

jjr  Sir, — My  friend,  Mr.  Rives,  is  about  to  take  his  station 
in  Paris  as  diplomatic  representative  of  the  U.  States,  and  not 
doubting  that  an  acquaintance  will  be  mutually  agreeable,  I 
wish  to  open  a  direct  way  to  it  by  this  introduction.  You  will 
find  him  equally  enlightened  and  amiable,  with  liberal  views  on 
all  subjects,  and  with  dispositions  to  cherish  the  friendly  feel- 
ings and  improve  the  beneficial  intercourse  between  France  and 
the  United  States,  which  I  venture  to  assure  him  are  not  want- 
ing on  your  part. 

I  have  seen  with  sincere  regret  a  late  notice  that  your  health 
was  not  good.  I  hope  this  will  find  it  re-established,  and  that, 
with  the  assurance  of  my  high  esteem,  you  will  accept  my  cor- 
dial salutations. 


TO    GENERAL   LA   FAYETTE. 

JUxNE  15,  1829. 

My  dear  friend, — Your  letter  of  January  28  came  duly  to 
hand.  The  answer  to  it  has  been  procrastinated  to  this  late 
day,  by  circumstances  which  you  will  gather  from  it. 

I  am  glad  to  learn  that  the  regenerating  spirit  continues  to 
work  well  in  your  public  councils,  as  well  as  in  the  popular 
mind;  and  elsewhere  as  well  as  in  France.  It  is  equally  strange 
and  shameful  that  England,  with  her  boasted  freedom,  instead 
of  taking  the  lead  in  the  glorious  cause,  should  frown  on  it  as 
she  has  done,  and  should  aim  as  she  now  does  to  baffle  the  more 


40  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

generous  policy  of  France  in  behalf  of  the  Greeks.  The  con- 
trast will  increase  the  lustre  reflected  on  her  rival. 

On  the  receipt  of  your  letter,  I  communicated  to  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son Randolph  the  contents  of  the  paragraph  which  had  refer- 
ence to  him;  asking  from  him,  at  the  same  time,  such  informa- 
tion as  would  assist  my  answer  to  you.  His  intense  occupations 
of  several  sorts,  and  particularly  the  constant  attention  re- 
quired to  the  edition  of  his  grandfather's  writings,  may  explain 
the  delay  in  hearing  from  him.  I  understand,  also,  that  he  lias 
himself  written  to  }rou  on  that  subject, "and  with  a  view  to  a 
French  edition.  I  am  not  able  to  say  what  will  be  the  success 
of  the  publication  here.  The  prospect  is  in  some  respects  en- 
couraging, but  I  fear  much  short  of  the  desideratum  for  balan- 
cing the  Monticello  affairs.  Much  of  the  landed  estate,  indeed, 
is  still  unsold;  but  such  is  the  extreme  depreciation  of  that  spe- 
cies of  property,  and  the  unexampled  defect  of  purchasers,  that 
a  very  restricted  reliance  can  be  placed  on  that  resource.  Mrs. 
Randolph,  with  her  family,  will  soon  remove  to  the  city  of 
Washington;  uniting  in  an  establishment  there  with  Mr.  'Frist, 
who  married  one  of  her  daughters,  and  has  a  place  in  the  De- 
partment of  State  yielding  him  about  $1,400  per  annum.  This, 
with  the  interest,  $1,200,  from  South  Carolina  and  Louisiana 
donations,  will,  it  is  understood,  be  the  sole  dependence,  scanty 
as  it  is. 

It  has  been  generally  known  that  Mr.  Le  Vasseur  has  pre- 
pared an  account  of  your  visit  to  the  United  States,  and  that  a 
translation  is  in  the  press  at  Philadelphia.  Of  its  progress  I 
am  not  informed.  T  am  aware  of  the  delicacy  of  your  situation, 
and  take  for  granted  that  the  author  will  himself  have  guarded 
it  against  the  danger  of  indelicate  suppositions  of  any  sort. 

I  shall  commit  this  to  my  friend,  Mr.  Rives,  for  whom  it  will 
serve  as  an  introduction,  should  it  not  be  rendered  superfluous 
by  your  personal  recollections.  He  goes  to  France  as  the  dip- 
lomatic representative  of  the  United  States,  after  having  distin- 
guished himself  as  a  Legislative  one  at  home.  He  possesses 
excellent  talents,  with  amiable  dispositions,  and  is  worthy  of 
the  kindnesses  which  you  love  to  bestow  where  they  are  due. 


1820.  LETTERS.  41 

I  refer  to  him  for  the  full  information,  which  may  be  accept- 
able to  you,  on  many  subjects  public  and  individual.  Being  of 
course  in  the  confidence  of  the  present  Administration,  he  may 
know  more  than  may  be  generally  known  of  the  Cabinet  policy 
on  subjects  not  under  the  seal  of  secrecy. 

I  have  been  for  some  time  past  in  bad  health;  for  a  few  days 
quite  ill.  I  am  now  considerably  advanced  in  a  recovery.  I 
hope  you  continue  to  enjoy  the  full  advantage  of  your  fine  con- 
stitution, and  that  you  will  live  to  witness  an  irreversible  tri- 
umph everywhere  of  the  cause  to  which  you  have  ever  been 
devoted. 

With  my  best  regards  for  your  estimable  son,  and  best  wishes 
for  the  domestic  circle  of  which  you  are  the  centre,  I  renew  the 
assurance  of  my  constant  and  affectionate  attachment. 


TO   JOHN   FINCH. 

Montpellier,  June  20,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  in  due  time  your  letter  of  May  10th, 
inclosing  a  continuation  of  your  observations  on  the  "  Natural 
boundaries  of  Empires."  The  views  you  have  taken  of  the  sub- 
ject give  it  certainly  an  attractive  interest.  But  T  must  retain 
the  impression  that  they  may  reasonably  be  qualified  by  the 
progress  of  human  art  in  controuling  the  operation  of  physical 
causes. 

I  should  have  sooner  acknowledged  your  favor  but  for  an 
indisposition,  which  proved  tedious,  and  from  which  I  am  not 
yet  entirely  recovered. 

With  cordial  respects  and  good  wishes. 


TO   ALBERT   GALLATIN. 

Montpellier,  July  13,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — Learning  from  Mr.  Rives  that  he  expects  to  be 
in  New  York  some  days  before  his  embarkation  for  France,  I 


42  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

take  the  liberty  of  giving  him  a  line  for  you.  I  need  not  refer 
to  his  high  public  standing,  derived  from  the  aide  part  he  has 
borne  in  public  affairs,  that  being  of  course  known  to  yon;  but 
as  a  friend  and  neighbour,  1  wish  to  bear  my  testimony  to  his 
great  personal  worth;  and  the  rather,  as  his  high  respect  for 
your  character,  and  his  just  idea  of  your  acquaintance  with  our 
relations  with  France,  and  the  temper  and  views  of  its  Govern- 
ment, will  render  any  conversations  thereon  with  which  he  may 
be  favored  particularly  gratifying.  Whatever  confidence  may 
be  implied  by  the  scope  of  any  part  of  them  will  be  in  the  safest 
hands,  and  turned  to  the  best  account. 

I  pray  you  to  be  assured  always  of  my  great  and  affectionate 
esteem. 


TO   PROFESSOR   TUCKER. 

Montpellier,  July  20.  1S29. 

Dear  Sir, — Inclosed  is  a  copy  of  the  original  draft  of  the 
present  Constitution  of  Virginia,  from  a  printed  copy,  now  per- 
haps a  solitary  relic.  It  may  fill  a  few  pages  of  the  Museum, 
when  not  otherwise  appropriated.  Who  the  author  of  the  draft 
was  does  not  appear.  Col.  Geo.  Mason  is  known  to  have  been 
the  most  conspicuous  member  in  discussing  the  subject  and  con- 
ducting it  through  the  Convention. 

Do  me  the  favor  to  send  me  the  2d  N°  of  the  Museum,  which 
never  came  to  hand,  and  to  have  me  credited  for  the  $5  in- 
closed. I  am  sorry  that  this  neighbourhood  furnishes  as  yet 
no  subscriptions  for  the  work. 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    CABELL. 


Montpellier,  Aug*  16,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  5th  found  me  under  a  return 
of  indisposition  which  has  not  yet  left  me.  To  this  cause  you 
must  ascribe  the  tardiness  of  my  attention  to  it. 


1829.  LETTERS.  43 

Your  speech,  with  the  accompanying  notes  and  documents, 
will  make  a  very  interesting  and  opportune  publication.  I 
think,  with  Mr.  Johnson,  that  your  view  of  the  Virginia  doc- 
trine in  '9S-'99  is  essentially  correct,  and  easily  guarded  against 
any  honest  misconstructions.  I  have  pencilled  a  very  few  inter- 
lineations and  erasures,  (easily  removed  if  not  approved,)  hav- 
ing that  object.  I  wish  you  to  revise  them  with  an  eye  to  the 
language  of  Virginia  in  her  proceedings  of  that  epoch,  happen- 
ing to  be  without  a  remaining  copy  of  them.  I  make  the  same 
request  as  to  my  remarks  below,  involving  a  reference  to  those 
proceedings.  As  to  the  two  paragraphs  in  brackets,  disliked 
by  Mr.  J.,  I  am  at  some  loss  what  to  say.  Though  they  may  cer- 
tainly bo  spared  without  leaving  a  flaw,  the  first  of  them,  at 
least,  is  so  well  calculated  to  rescue  the  authority  of  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son on  the  constitutionality  of  the  tariff  from  the  perverted  and 
disrespectful  use  made  of  it,  that  I  should  hesitate  in  advising 
a  suppression  of  it. 

On  the  subject  of  an  arbiter  or  umpire,  it  might  not  be  amiss, 
perhaps,  to  note  at  some  place,  that  there  can  be  none,  exter- 
nal to  the  United  States  more  than  to  individual  States;  nor 
within  either,  for  those  extreme  cases  of  passive  obedience  and 
non-resistence  which  justify  and  require  a  resort  to  the  original 
rights  of  the  parties  to  the  compact.  But  that  in  all  cases,  not 
of  that  extreme  character,  there  is  an  arbiter  or  umpire  as  within 
the  Governments  of  the  States,  so  within  that  of  the  U.  States 
in  the  authority  constitutionally  provided  for  deciding  controver- 
sies concerning  boundaries  of  right  and  power.  The  provision 
in  the  U.  States  is  particularly  stated  in  the  Federalist,  N°  39, 
p.  241,  Gideon's  edition. 

The  tonnage  and  other  duties  for  encouraging  navigation  arc, 
in  their  immediate  operation,  as  locally  partial  to  Northern 
ship-owners,  as  a  tariff  on  particular  imports  is  partial  to 
Northern  manufacturers.  Yet,  South  Carolina  has  uniformly 
favored  the  former  as  ultimately  making  us  independent  of 
foreign  navigation,  and,  therefore,  in  reality  of  a  national  char- 
acter. Ought  she  not,  in  like  manner,  to  concur  in  encouraging 
manufactures,  though  immediately  partial  to  some  local  inter- 


44  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

ests,  in  consideration  of  their  ultimate  effect  in  making  the 
nation  independent  of  foreign  supplies;  provided  the  encourage- 
ment be  not  unnecessarily  unequal  in  the  immediate  operation, 
nor  extended  to  articles  not  within  the  reason  of  the  policy  ? 

On  comparing  the  doctrine  of  Virginia  in  '98-'99  with  that 
of  the  present  day  in  S.  Carolina,  will  it  not  be  found  that  Vir- 
ginia asserted  that  the  States,  as  parties  to  the  constitutional 
compact,  had  a  right  and  were  bound,  in  extreme  cases  only, 
and  after  a  failure  of  all  efforts  for  redress  under  the  forms  of 
the  Constitution,  to  interpose  in  their  sovereign  capacity  for 
the  purpose  of  arresting  the  evil  of  usurpation  and  preserving 
the  Constitution  andUnion?  whereas  the  doctrine  of  the  present 
day  in  S.  Carolina  asserts,  that  in  a  case  of  not  greater  magni- 
tude than  the  degree  of  inequality  in  the  operation  of  a  tariff  in 
favor  of  manufactures,  she  may  of  herself  finally  decide,  by  vir- 
tue of  her  sovereignty,  that  the  Constitution  has  been  violated; 
and  that  if  not  yielded  to  by  the  Federal  Government,  though 
supported  by  all  the  other  States,  she  may  rightfully  resist  it 
and  withdraw  herself  from  the  Union. 

Is  not  the  resolution  of  the  Assembly  at  their  last  session 
against  the  tariff  a  departure  from  the  ground  taken  at  the  pre- 
ceding session?  If  my  recollection  does  not  err,  the  power  of 
Congress  to  lay  imposts  was  restricted  at  this  session  to  the 
sole  case  of  revenue.  Their  late  resolution  denies  it  only  in 
the  case  of  manufactures,  tacitly  admitting,  according  to  the 
modifications  of  South  Carolina,  tonnage  duties  and  duties 
counteracting  foreign  regulations.  If  the  inconsistency  be  as  I 
suppose,  be  so  good  as  to  favor  me  with  a  transcript  of  the  res- 
olutions of  the  penult  session.  Your  letter  returning  those  bor- 
rowed was  duly  received  some  time  ago. 


TO   THOMAS   S.    HINDE. 

Montpellier,  Aug.  17,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  July  23  was  duly  received,  but  at 
a  time  when  I  was  uuder  an  indisposition,  remains  of  which  are 


1829.  LETTERS.  45 

still  upon  me.  I  know  not  whence  the  error  originated  that  1 
was  engaged  in  writing  the  history  of  our  Country.  It  is  true 
that  some  of  my  correspondences  during  a  prolonged  public  life, 
with  other  manuscripts  connected  with  important  public  trans- 
actions, are  on  my  files,  and  may  contribute  materials  for  a  his- 
torical pen.  But  a  regular  history  of  our  Country,  even  during 
its  Revolutionary  and  Independent  character,  would  be  a  task 
forbidden  by  the  age  alone  at  which  I  returned  to  private  life, 
and  requiring  lights  on  various  subjects,  which  arc  gradually 
to  be  drawn  from  sources  not  yet  opened  for  public  use.  The 
friendly  tone  of  your  letter  has  induced  me  to  make  these  ex- 
planatory remarks,  which,  being  meant  for  yourself  only,  I 
must  request  may  be  so  considered. 

The  authentic  facts  which  it  appears  you  happen  to  possess 
relating  to  the  criminal  enterprise  in  the  West  during  the  ad- 
ministration of  Mr.  Jefferson,  must  merit  preservation  as  be- 
longing to  a  history  of  that  period;  and  if  no  repository  more 
eligible  occurs  to  you,  a  statement  of  them  may  find  a  place 
among  my  political  papers.  The  result  of  that  enterprise  is 
among  the  auspicious  pledges  given  by  the  genius  of  Republican 
institutions  and  the  spirit  of  a  free  people,  for  future  triumphs 
over  dangers  of  every  sort  that  may  be  encountered  in  our  na- 
tional career. 

I  cannot  be  insensible  to  the  motives  which  prompted  the  too 
partial  views  you  have  taken  of  my  public  services,  and  which 
claim  from  me  the  good  wishes  which  I  tender  you. 


TO   JOSEPH   C.    CABELL. 

Montpellier,  Sepf  7,  1829. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  on  the  evening  of  Friday  your  two 
letters  of  Aug1  30  and  Sepr  1,  with  the  copy  of  the  Virginia 
proceedings  in  '98-99,  and  the  letters  of  "Hampden." 

When  I  looked  over  your  manuscript  pamphlet,  lately  re- 
turned to  you,  my  mind  did  not  advert  to  a  discrepancy  in  your 
recorded  opinions,  nor  to  the  popularity  of  the  rival  jurisdic- 


46  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

tion  claimed  by  the  Court  of  Appeals.  Your  exchange  of  a 
hasty  opinion  for  one  resulting  from  fuller  information  and  ma- 
tured reflection  might  safely  defy  animadversion.  But  it  is  a 
more  serious  question,  how  far  the  advice  of  the  two  friends  you 
have  consulted,  founded  on  the  unanimous  claim  of  the  Court 
having  Judge  Roane  at  its  head,  ought  to  he  disregarded;  or 
how  far  it  might  be  expedient,  in  the  present  temper  of  the 
country,  to  mingle  that  popular  claim  with  the  Tariff  heresy, 
which  is  understood  to  be  tottering  in  the  public  opinion,  and 
to  which  your  observations  and  references  are  calculated  to 
give  a  very  heavy  blow.  It  were  to  be  wished  that  the  two 
Judges  [Cabell  and  Coalter]  could  read  your  manuscript,  and 
then  decide  on  its  aptitude  for  public  use.  Would  it  be  impos- 
sible so  to  remould  the  Essay  as  to  drop  what  might  be  offen- 
sive to  the  opponents  of  the  necessary  power  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  U.  States,  but  who  are  sound  as  to  the  Tariff 
power,  retaining  only  what  relates  to  the  Tariff,  or,  at  most,  to 
the  disorganizing  doctrine  which  asserts  a  right  in  every  State 
to  withdraw  itself  from  the  Union?  Were  this  a  mere  league, 
each  of  the  parties  would  have  an  equal  right  to  expound  it; 
and,  of  course,  there  would  be  as  much  right  in  one  to  insist  on 
the  bargain,  as  in  another  to  renounce  it.  But  the  Union  of 
the  States  is,  according  to  the  Virginia  doctrine  in  '98- '99,  a 
Constitutional  Union;  and  the  right  to  judge  in  the  last  resort, 
concerning  usurpations  of  power,  affecting  the  validity  of  the 
Union,  referred  by  that  doctrine  to  the  parties  to  the  compact. 
On  recurring  to  original  principles,  and  to  extreme  cases,  a 
single  State  might  indeed  be  so  oppressed  as  to  be  just i lied  in 
shaking  off  the  yoke;  so  might  a  single  couuty  of  a  State  be, 
under  an  extremity  of  oppression.  But  until  such  justifications 
can  be  pleaded,  the  compact  is  obligatory  in  both  cases.  It  may 
be  difficult  to  do  full  justice  to  this  branch  of  the  subject,  with- 
out involving  the  question  between  the  State  and  Federal  Judi- 
ciaries. But  I  am  not  sure  that  the  plan  of  your  pamphlet  will 
not  admit  a  separation.  On  this  supposition,  it  might  be  well, 
as  soon  as  the  Tariff  fever  shall  have  spent  itself,  to  take  up 
both  the  Judicial  and  the  anti-union  heresies;  on  each  of  which 


1829.  LETTERS.  47 

you  will  have  a  field  for  instructive  investigation,  with  the  ad- 
vantage of  properly  connecting  them  in  their  hearings. 

Jg@a'  A  political  system  that  does  not  provide  for  a  peaceahle 
and  effectual  decision  of  all  controversies  arising  among  the 
parties  is  not  a  Government,  but  a  mere  treaty  between  inde- 
pendent nations,  without  any  resort  for  terminating  disputes 
but  negotiation,  and  that  failing,  the  sword.  That  the  system 
of  the  U.  States  is,  what  it  professes  to  be,  a  real  Government, 
and  not  a  nominal  one  only,  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  it  has  all 
the  practical  attributes  and  organs  of  a  real,  though  limited 
Government;  a  Legislative,  Executive,  and  Judicial  Depart- 
ment, with  the  physical  means  of  executing  the  particular  au- 
thorities assigned  to  it,  on  the  individual  citizens,  in  like  man- 
ner as  is  done  by  other  Governments.  Those  who  would  sub- 
stitute negotiation  for  governmental  authority,  and  rely  on  the 
former  as  an  adequate  resource,  forget  the  essential  difference 
between  disputes  to  be  settled  by  two  branches  of  the  same 
Government,  as  between  the  House  of  Lords  and  Commons  in 
England,  or  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  here,  and 
disputes  between  different  Governments.  In  the  former  case, 
as  neither  party  can  act  without  the  other,  necessity  produces 
an  adjustment.  In  the  other  case,  each  party  having,  in  a  Le- 
gislative, Executive,  and  Judicial  Department  of  its  own,  the 
complete  means  of  giving  an  independent  effect  to  its  will,  no 
such  necessity  exists;  and  physical  collisions  are  the  natural 
result  of  conflicting  pretensions. 

In  the  years  1819  and  1821, 1  had  a  very  cordial  correspond- 
ence with  the  author  of  "Hampden"  and  "Algernon  Sydney," 
[Judge  Roane.]  Although  we  agreed  generally  in  our  views  of 
certain  doctrines  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  I 
was  induced  in  my  last  letter  to  touch  on  the  necessity  of  a  de- 
finitive power,  on  questions  between  the  U.  States  and  the  indi- 
vidual States,  and  the  necessity  of  its  being  lodged  in  the  former, 
where  alone  it  could  preserve  the  essential  uniformity.  I  re- 
ceived no  answer,  which,  indeed,  was  not  required,  my  letter 
beino;  an  answer. 


48  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

I  shall  return  the  printed  pamphlet  as  soon  as  I  have  read 
the  letters  of  "Hampden"  making  a  part  of  it. 

I  have  not  the  acts  of  the  session  in  question;  and  will  thank 
you,  when  you  have  the  opportunity,  to  examine  the  preambles 
to  the  polemic  resolutions  of  the  Assembly,  and  let  me  know 
whether  or  not  they  present  an  inconsistency.  If  I  mistake  not, 
Governor  Tyler's  Message  emphatically  denounced  all  imposts 
on  commerce  not  exclusively  levied  for  the  purposes  of  revenue. 

I  return  the  letter  of  Mr.  Morris,  inclosed  in  yours  received 
some  time  ago.  Mr.  Pollard  ought  to  have  been  at  no  loss  for 
my  wish  to  ascertain  the  authorship  of  "The  danger  not  over:** 
the  tendency,  if  not  the  object,  of  the  republication,  with  the 
suggestion  that  I  had  a  hand  in  the  paper,  being  to  shew  an  in- 
consistency between  my  opinion  then  and  now  on  the  subject  of 
the  Tariff  power.  It  may  not  be  amiss  to  receive  the  further 
explanations  of  Mr.  Pollard.  But  I  learn  from  Mr.  Robert 
Taylor,  who  was  a  student  of  law  at  the  time  with  Mr.  Pendle- 
ton, that  he  saw  a  letter  to  him  from  Mr.  Jefferson  expressing 
a  desire  that  he  would  take  up  his  pen  at  the  crisis;  but  with- 
out, as  Mr.  Taylor  recollects,  furnishing  any  particular  ideas 
for  it,  or  naming  me  on  the  occasion.  I  believe  a  copy  of  the 
letter  is  among  Mr.  Jefferson's  papers,  and  that  it  corresponds 
with  Mr.  Taylor's  account  of  it. 

I  comply  with  your  request  to  destroy  your  two  letters;  and, 
as  this  has  been  written  in  haste  and  with  interruption  of  com- 
pany, it  will  be  best  disposed  of  in  the  same  way.  Some  of  the 
passages  in  it  called  for  more  consideration  and  precision  than 
I  could  bestow  on  them. 

P.  S.  Since  the  above  was  written,  I  have  received  yours  of 
the  3d  instant.  There  could  not  be  a  stronger  proof  of  the  ob- 
scurity of  the  passage  it  refers  to  than  its  not  being  intelligible 
to  you.  Its  meaning  is  expressed  in  the  slip  of  paper  inclosed. 
The  passage  may  be  well  enough  dispensed  with,  as  being  de- 
veloped in  that  marked  above  by  fig^T. 

Copy  of  the  slip:  "Note  that  there  can,  of  course,  be  no  regu- 


1829.  LETTERS.  49 

lar  Arbiter  or  Umpire,  under  any  governmental  system,  appli- 
cable to  those  extreme  cases,  or  questions  of  passive  obedience 
and  non-resistence,  which  justify  and  require  a  resort  to  the 
original  rights  of  the  parties  to  the  system  or  compact;  but  that 
in  all  cases  not  of  that  extreme  character,  there  is  and  must  be 
an  Arbiter  or  Umpire  in  the  constitutional  authority  provided 
for  deciding  questions  concerning  the  boundaries  of  right  and 
power.  The  particular  provision  in  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  is  in  the  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court,  as 
stated  in  the  'Federalist/  No.  39." 

VOL.  IV.  4 


SPEECH  IN  THE  VIRGINIA  STATE  CONVENTION  OF  1829-'30,  ON  THE 

QUESTION  OF  THE  RATIO  OF  REPRESENTATION  IN  THE 

TWO  BRANCHES  OF  THE  LEGISLATURE. 


December  2,  1829. 


Mr.  Madison  rose  and  addressed  the  Chair;  the  members 
rushed  from  their  seats  and  crowded  around  him: 

Although  the  actual  posture  of  the  subject  before  the  Com- 
mittee might  admit  a  full  survey  of  it,  it  is  not  my  purpose,  in 
rising,  to  enter  into  the  wide  field  of  discussion,  which  has  called 
forth  a  display  of  intellectual  resources  and  varied  powers  of 
eloquence  that  any  country  might  be  proud  of,  and  which  I 
have  witnessed  with  the  highest  gratification.  Having  been, 
for  a  very  long  period,  withdrawn  from  any  participation  in 
proceedings  of  deliberative  bodies,  and  under  other  disqualifi- 
cations now,  of  which  I  am  deeply  sensible,  though,  perhaps,  less 
sensible  than  others  may  perceive  that  I  ought  to  be,  I  shall  not 
attempt  more  than  a  few  observations,  which  may  suggest  the 
views  I  have  taken  of  the  subject,  and  which  will  consume  but 
little  of  the  time  of  the  Committee,  now  become  precious.  It 
is  sufficiently  obvious,  that  persons  and  property  are  the  two 
great  subjects  on  which  Governments  are  to  act;  and  that  the 
rights  of  persons,  and  the  rights  of  property,  are  the  objects,  for 
the  protection  of  which  Government  was  instituted.  These 
rights  cannot  well  be  separated.  The  personal  right  to  acquire 
property,  which  is  a  natural  right,  gives  to  property,  when  ac- 
quired, a  right  to  protection,  as  a  social  right.  The  essence  of 
Government  is  power;  and  power,  lodged  as  it  must  be  in  hu- 
man hands,  will  ever  be  liable  to  abuse.  In  Monarchies,  the 
interests  and  happiness  of  all  may  be  sacrificed  to  the  caprice 
and  passion  of  a  despot.  In  Aristocracies,  the  rights  and  wel- 
fare of  the  many  may  be  sacrificed  to  the  pride  and  cupidity  of 
the  few.     In  Republics,  the  great  danger  is,  that  the  majority 


52  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1829. 

may  not  sufficiently  respect  the  rights  of  the  minority.  Some 
gentlemen,  consulting  the  purity  and  generosity  of  their  own 
minds,  without  adverting  to  the  lessons  of  experience,  would 
find  a  security  against  that  danger  in  our  social  feelings;  in  a 
respect  for  character;  in  the  dictates  of  the  monitor  within;  in 
the  interests  of  individuals;  in  the  aggregate  interests  of  the 
community.  But  man  is  known  to  be  a  selfish  as  well  as  a  social 
being.  Respect  for  character,  though  often  a  salutary  restraint, 
is  but  too  often  overruled  by  other  motives.  When  numbers  of 
men  act  in  a  body,  respect  for  character  is  often  lost,  just  in 
proportion  as  it  is  necessary  to  control  what  is  not  right.  We 
all  know  that  conscience  is  not  a  sufficient  safeguard;  and  be- 
sides, that  conscience  itself  may  be  deluded;  may  be  misled,  by 
an  unconscious  bias,  into  acts  which  an  enlightened  conscience 
would  forbid.  As  to  the  permanent  interest  of  individuals  in 
the  aggregate  interests  of  the  community,  and  in  the  proverbial 
maxim,  that  honesty  is  the  best  policy,  present  temptation  is  too 
often  found  to  be  an  over-match  for  those  considerations.  These 
favourable  attributes  of  the  human  character  are  all  valuable, 
as  auxiliaries;  but  they  will  not  serve  as  a  substitute  for  the 
coercive  provisions  belonging  to  Government  and  Law.  They 
will  always,  in  proportion  as  they  prevail,  be  favourable  to  a 
mild  administration  of  both;  but  they  can  never  be  relied  on  as 
a  guaranty  of  the  rights  of  the  minority  against  a  majority  dis- 
posed to  take  unjust  advantage  of  its  power.  The  only  effectual 
safeguard  to  the  rights  of  the  minority  must  be  laid  in  such  a 
basis  and  structure  of  the  Government  itself  as  may  afford,  in 
a  certain  degree,  directly  or  indirectly,  a  defensive  authority  in 
behalf  of  a  minority  having  right  on  its  side. 

To  come  more  nearly  to  the  subject  before  the  Committee, 
viz:  that  peculiar  feature  in  our  community  which  calls  for  a 
peculiar  division  in  the  basis  of  our  Government,  I  mean  the 
coloured  part  of  our  population.  It  is  apprehended,  if  the 
power  of  the  Commonwealth  shall  be  in  the  hands  of  a  majority, 
who  have  no  interest  in  this  species  of  property,  that,  from  the 
facility  with  which  it  may  be  oppressed  by  excessive  taxation, 
injustice  may  be  done  to  its  owners.     It  would  seem,  therefore, 


1829.        SPEECH    ON,    ETC.,    REPRESENTATION.  53 

if  we  can  incorporate  that  interest  into  the  basis  of  our  system, 
it  will  be  the  most  apposite  and  effectual  security  that  can, be 
devised.  Such  an  arrangement  is  recommended  to  me  by  many- 
very  important  considerations.  It  is  due  to  justice;  due  to  hu 
manity;  due  to  truth;  to  the  sympathies  of  our  nature;  in  fine, 
to  our  character  as  a  people,  both  abroad  and  at  home,  that  they 
should  be  considered,  as  much  as  possible,  in  the  light  of  human 
beings,  and  not  as  mere  property.  As  such,  they  are  acted  upon 
by  our  laws,  and  have  an  interest  in  our  laws.  They  may  be 
considered  as  making  a  part,  though  a  degraded  part,  of  the 
families  to  which  they  belong. 

If  they  had  the  complexion  of  the  Serfs  in  the  north  of  Eu- 
rope, or  of  the  Villeins,  formerly  in  England;  in  other  terms,  if 
they  were  of  our  own  complexion,  much  of  the  difficulty  would 
be  removed.  But  the  mere  circumstance  of  complexion  cannot 
deprive  them  of  the  character  of  men.  The  Federal  number,  as 
it  is  called,  is  particularly  recommended  to  attention  in  form- 
ing a  basis  of  representation,  by  its  simplicity,  its  certainty,  its 
stability,  and  its  permanency.  Other  expedients  for  securing 
justice  in  the  case  of  taxation,  while  they  amount  in  pecuniary 
effect  to  the  same  thing,  have  been  found  liable  to  great  objec- 
tions; and  I  do  not  believe  that  a  majority  of  this  Convention 
is  disposed  to  adopt  them,  if  they  can  find  a  substitute  they  can 
approve.  Nor  is  it  a  small  recommendation  of  the  Federal  num- 
ber, in  my  view,  that  it  is  in  conformity  to  the  ratio  recognised 
in  the  Federal  Constitution.  The  cases,  it  is  true,  are  not  pre- 
cisely the  same,  but  there  is  more  of  analogy  than  might  at  first 
be  supposed.  If  the  coloured  population  were  equally  diffused 
through  the  State,  the  analogy  would  fail;  but  existing  as  it 
does,  in  large  masses,  in  particular  parts  of  it,  the  distinction 
between  the  different  parts  of  the  State  resembles  that  between 
the  slaveholding  and  non-slaveholding  States;  and,  if  we  reject 
a  doctrine  in  our  own  State,  whilst  we  claim  the  benefit  of  it  in 
our  relations  to  other  States,  other  disagreeable  consequences 
may  be  added  to  the  charge  of  inconsistency  which  will  be 
brought  against  us.  If  the  example  of  our  sister  States  is  to 
have  weight,  we  find  that  in  Georgia  the  Federal  number  is 


54  WORKS    OP    MADISON.  1829. 

made  the  basis  of  representation  in  both  branches  of  their  Legis- 
lature; and  I  do  nol  learn  that  any  dissatisfaction  or  inconve- 
nience has  flowed  from  its  adoption.  I  wish  we  could  know 
more  of  the  manner  in  which  particular  organizations  of  Gov- 
ernment operate  in  other  parts  of  the  United  States.  There 
would  bo  loss  danger  of  being  misled  into  errorj  and  we  should 
have  the  advantage  of  their  experience  as  well  as  our  own.  Jn 
the  case  I  mention,  there  can,  I  believe,  be  no  error. 

Whether,  therefore,  wo  be  fixing  a  basis  of  representation  for 
the  one  branch  or  the  oilier  of  our  Legislature,  or  for  both,  in 
a  combination  with  oilier  principles,  the  Federal  ratio  is  a  fa- 
vourite resource  with  me.  It  entered  into  myearliesl  news  of 
the  subject  before  this  Convention  was  assembled;  and  though 
I  have  kept  my  mind  open,  have  listened  to  every  proposition 
which  lias  been  advanced,  and  given  to  them  all  a  candid  con- 
sideration, I  must  say,  that,  in  my  judgment,  we  shall  act  wisely 
in  preferring  it  to  others  which  have  been  brought  before  us. 
Should  the  Federal  number  be  made  to  enter  into  the  basis  in 
one  branch  of  the  Legislature  and  not  into  the  other,  such  an 
arrangement  might  prove  favourable  to  the  slaves  themselves. 
It  may  be,  and  J  think  it  has  been  suggested,  that  these  who 
have  themselves  no  interest  in  this  species  of  property,  arc  apt 
to  sympathize  with  the  slaves  more  than  may  be  the  case  with 

(heir  masters;  and  would,  therefore,  be  disposed,  when  they  had 
the  ascendency,  to  protect  them  from  laws  of  an  oppressive  char- 
acter; whilst  the  masters,  who  have  a  common  interest  with 
the  slaves,  against  undue  taxation,  which  must  be  paid  out  of 
their  labour,  will  be  their  protectors  when  they  have  the  as- 
cendency. 

The  Convention  is  now  arrived  at  a  point  where  we  must 
agree  on  some  common  ground,  all  sides  relaxing  in  their  opin- 
ions, not  changing,  but  mutually  surrendering  a  part  of  them. 
In  framing  a,  Constitution,  great  difficulties  an1  necessarily  to 

be  overcome;  and  nothing  can  ever  overcome  them  but  a  spirit 
of  compromise.  Other  nations  are  surprised  at  nothing  so  much 
as  our  having  been  able  to  form  Constitutions  in  the  manner 
which  has  been  exemplified  in  this  country.     Even  the  Union 


1829.        SPEECH    ON,    ETC.,    REPRESENTATION.  55 

of  so  many  States  is,  in  the  eyes  of  the  world,  a  wonder;  the 
harmonious  establishment  of  a  common  Government  over  them 
all,  a  miracle.  I  cannot  but  flatter  myself,  that,  without  a  mir- 
acle, we  shall  be  able  to  arrange  all  difficulties.  I  never  have 
despaired,  notwithstanding  all  the  threatening  appearances  we 
have  passed  through.  I  have  now  more  than  a  hope — a  con- 
soling confidence  that  we  shall  at  last  find  that  our  labours  have 
not  been  in  vain. 


LETTERS. 


TO   C.   J.   INGERSOLL. 

Richmond,  Jan?  8,  1830. 

Dear  SrR, — Yours  of  December  26  was  duly  received,  and  I 
should  have  yielded  less  to  the  causes  of  delay  in  acknowledging 
it,  had  my  recollections  furnished  any  particular  information  on 
the  subject  of  it;  and  my  present  situation  does  not  permit 
the  searches  which  might  aid  them. 

It  would  seem  that  the  exercise  of  Executive  power  in  the 
cases  referred  to,  without  the  intervention  of  the  Judiciary,  was 
regarded  as  warranted  by  the  law  of  nations  as  part  of  the 
social  law;  and  that  the  State  Executives  became  the  Federal 
instruments,  by  virtue  of  their  authority  over  the  militia.  If 
the  term  "instructed"  was  used  in  the  call  on  them,  it  is  one 
that  would  not  be  relished  now  by  some  of  them  at  least. 

Will  not  the  debate  on  the  case  of  Robbins,  particularly  the 
speech  of  the  [present  ?]  C.  Justice,  disclosed  the  probable  grounds 
on  which  the  Federal  Executive  proceeded?  I  have  not  the 
means  of  consulting  that  source  of  information,  but  am  under 
the  impression  that  the  cases  hinged  on  analogous  principles. 

Our  Convention  is  now  in  the  pangs  of  parturition.  Whether 
the  result  is  to  be  an  abortion,  or  an  offspring  worthy  of  life, 
will  shortly  be  determined.  The  radical  cause  of  our  difficulties 
has  been  the  coloured  population,  which  happens  to  lie  in  one 
geographical  half  of  the  State,  and  to  have  been  the  great  ob- 
ject of  taxation.  Compromising  efforts  required  by  this  pecu- 
liarity have  checked  the  projects  and  votes  in  a  very  curious 
and,  to  strangers,  unintelligible  manner.  The  main  object  with 
many  has  been  to  produce  modifications  that  would  be  likely 
to  get  through  the  Convention,  and  not  be  rejected  by  the  peo- 


58  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

pie;  and,  at  the  same  time,  be  better  than  the  existing  Consti- 
tution, which  has  real  as  well  as  unpopular  deformities  that 
would  not  long  be  borne  without  very  exciting  attempts  for  a 
plenipotentiary  revision  of  them. 


TO   N.   P.   TRIST. 

February— ,  1830. 

DR  Sir, — I  return  the  paper  enclosed  in  yours  of  the  6th.  I 
have  found  in  it  the  proofs  of  ability  for  such  discussions  which 
I  should  have  anticipated.  As  I  understand  your  discrimina- 
ting view  (and  it  seems  to  be  clearly  expressed)  of  the  Virginia 
documents  in  798-99,  it  rescues  them  from  the  hands  which  have 
misconstrued  and  misapplied  them.  The  meaning  collected 
from  the  general  scope,  and  from  a  collation  of  the  several  parts, 
ought  not  to  be  affected  by  a  particular  word  or  phrase  not 
irreconcilable  with  all  the  rest,  and  not  made  more  precise,  be- 
cause no  danger  of  their  being  misunderstood  was  thought  of. 

You  will  pardon  me  for  observing  that  you  seem  to  have  sup- 
posed a  greater  ignorance,  at  the  commencement  of  the  contest 
with  G-.  Britain,  of  the  doctrines  of  self-government,  than  was 
the  fact.  The  controversial  papers  of  the  epoch  show  it.  The 
date  of  the  Virginia  Declaration  of  Rights  would  itself  be  a 
witness.  The  merit  of  the  founders  of  our  Republics  lies  in  the 
more  accurate  views  and  the  practical  application  of  the  doc- 
trines. The  rights  of  man  as  the  foundation  of  just  Govern- 
ment had  been  long  understood;  but  the  superstructures  pro- 
jected had  been  sadly  defective.  Hume  himself  was  among 
these  bungling  lawgivers. 


TO   GENERAL   LA   FAYETTE. 

Febt  1,  1830. 

My  dear  Friend, — This  late  acknowledgment  of  your  letter 
X)f  Sep'  28  is  the  effect  of  its  reaching  me  at  Richmond,  where 
every  moment  of  my  time  was,  in  some  way  or  other,  exacted 


1830.  LETTERS.  59 

by  my  public  situation,  and  of  the  accumulated  arrears  of  a  pri- 
vate nature  requiring  my  attention. 

The  Convention,  which  called  forth  your  interesting  remarks 
and  generous  solicitudes,  was  pregnant  with  difficulties  of  va- 
rious sorts,  and,  at  times,  of  ominous  aspects.  Besides  the  ordi- 
nary conflicts  of  opinions  concerning  the  structure  of  Govern- 
ment, the  peculiarity  of  local  interests,  real  or  supposed,  and, 
above  all,  the  case  of  our  coloured  population,  which  happens 
to  be  confined  to  a  geographical  half  of  the  State,  and  to  have 
been  a  disproportionate  object  of  taxation,  were  sources  of  jeal- 
ousy and  collisions  which  infected  the  proceedings  throughout, 
and  were  finally  overcome  by  a  small  majority  only.  Every 
concession  of  private  opinion,  not  morally  inadmissible,  became 
necessary,  in  order  to  prevent  an  abortion  discreditable  to  the 
body  and  to  the  State,  and  inflicting  a  stain  on  the  great  cause 
of  self-government.  With  all  the  compromising  expedients  em- 
ployed, and  which  finally  obtained  a  successful  vote  within  the 
Convention,  it  remains  to  be  seen  what  will  be  the  fate  which 
awaits  the  recommended  plan  on  its  submission  to  the  people. 
It  makes  the  appeal  to  them  under  the  disadvantage  of  being 
stamped  with  the  dissent  of  the  members  of  the  Convention  rep- 
resenting the  ultramontane  part  of  the  State,  the  part  which  had 
called  loudest  for,  and  contributed  most  to,  the  experiment  for 
amending  the  Constitution.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  allevi- 
ates greatly  where  it  does  not  remove  the  objections  which  had 
been  urged,  and  justly  urged,  by  that  part;  whilst  the  other 
part  of  the  State,  which  was  opposed  to  any  change,  will  regard 
the  result  as  an  obstacle  to  another  Convention  which  might 
bring  about  greater  and  more  obnoxious  innovations.  On  the 
whole,  the  probability  is,  that  the  Constitution  as  amended  will 
be  sanctioned  by  the  popular  votes,  and  that  by  a  considerable 
majority.  Should  this  prove  to  be  the  case,  the  peculiar  diffi- 
culties which  will  have  been  overcome  ought  to  render  the  ex- 
periment a  new  evidence  of  the  capacity  of  men  for  self-govern- 
ment, instead  of  an  argument  in  the  hands  of  those  who  deny 
and  calumniate  it.  The  Convention  was  composed  of  the  elite, 
of  the  community,  and  exhibited  great  talents  in  the  discussions 


60  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

belonging  to  the  subject.  Mr.  Monroe,  and  still  more,  myself, 
were  too  mindful  of  the  years  over  our  heads  to  take  any  active 
part  in  them.  The  same  consideration  was  felt  by  Mr.  Mar- 
shall. I  may  add,  that  each  of  us  was  somewhat  fettered  by 
the  known,  and  in  some  important  instances  by  the  expressed, 
will  of  our  immediate  constituents. 

Your  anticipations  with  regard  to  the  slavery  among  us  were 
the  natural  offspring  of  your  just  principles  and  laudable  sym- 
pathies; but  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  the  occasion  which  led  to 
them  proved  to  be  little  fitted  for  the  slightest  interposition  on 
that  subject.  A  sensibility,  morbid  in  the  highest  degree,  was 
never  more  awakened  among  those  who  have  the  largest  stake 
in  that  species  of  interest,  and  the  most  violent  against  any  gov- 
ernmental movement  in  relation  to  it.  The  excitability  at  the 
moment,  happened,  also,  to  be  not  a  little  augmented  by  party 
questions  between  the  Soutli  and  the  North,  and  the  efforts  used 
to  make  the  circumstance  common  to  the  former  a  sympathetic 
bond  of  co-operation.  I  scarcely  express  myself  too  strongly 
in  saying,  that  any  allusion  in  the  Convention  to  the  subject 
you  have  so  much  at  heart  would  have  been  a  spark  to  a  mass 
of  gunpowder.  It  is  certain,  nevertheless,  that  time,  the  "great 
Innovator,"  is  not  idle  in  its  salutary  preparations.  The  Col- 
onization Society  are  becoming  more  and  more  one  of  its  agents. 
Outlets  for  the  freed  blacks  are  alone  wanted  for  a  rapid  era- 
sure of  the  blot  from  our  Republican  character. 

I  observe  in  the  foreign  journals  the  continued  struggle  you 
glance  at  between  the  good  and  evil  principles  on  your  side  of 
the  Atlantic.  The  manifestations  of  the  former,  on  your  visit 
to  the  south  of  France,  are  very  encouraging,  notwithstanding 
the  little  successes  of  the  latter  at  the  Central  Theatre.  Your 
friends  see,  with  the  greatest  pleasure,  in  such  incidents  the  con- 
fidence and  affection  which  bind  your  fellow-citizens  to  you,  and 
the  deep  interest  your  country  has  in  the  continuance  of  your 
life  and  health. 

I  had  wished  to  say  something  on  other  topics;  but  having 
been  so  long  without  thanking  you  for  your  last  kind  letter,  ] 
will  now  hasten  the  assurances  of  my  unalterable  attachment 


1830.  LETTERS.  61 

and  my  ardent  wishes  for  your  happiness,  in  which  Mrs.  M. 
joins  me,  as  she  does  in  the  offer  of  cordial  salutations  to  your 
highly  valued  son  and  our  common  friend  Col.  Le  Yasseur. 


TO.   N.   P.   TRIST. 

Montpelliek,  Feb.  15,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  favours  of ,  and  have 

looked  over  the  remarks  enclosed  in  them,  meant  as  an  intro- 
duction to  an  explanatory  comment  on  the  proceedings  of  Vir- 
ginia in  1798-'99,  occasioned  by  the  alien  and  sedition  laws. 

It  was  certainly  not  the  object  of  the  member  who  prepared 
the  documents  in  question  to  assert,  nor  does  the  fair  import  of 
them,  as  he  believes,  assert  a  right  in  the  parties  to  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  individually  to  annul  within  them- 
selves acts  of  the  Federal  Government,  or  to  withdraw  from  the 
Union;  nor  was  it  within  the  scope  of  those  documents  to  dis- 
cuss the  extreme  cases  in  which  such  rights  might  result  from  a 
kind  or  degree  of  oppression  extinguishing  all  constitutional 
compacts  and  obligations. 

It  has  been  too  much  the  case  in  expounding  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  that  its  meaning  has  been  sought,  not  in 
its  peculiar  and  unprecedented  modifications  of  power,  but  by 
viewing  it,  some  through  the  medium  of  a  simple  Government) 
others  through  that  of  a  mere  league  of  Governments.  It  is 
neither  the  one  nor  the  other,  but  essentially  different  from  both. 
It  must,  consequently,  be  its  own  interpreter.  No  other  Gov- 
ernment can  furnish  a  key  to  its  true  character.  Other  Gov- 
ernments present  an  individual  and  indivisible  sovereignty. 
The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  divides  the  sovereignty; 
the  portions  surrendered  by  the  States  composing  the  Federal 
sovereignty  over  specified  subjects;  the  portions  retained  form- 
ing the  sovereignty  of  each  over  the  residuary  subjects  within 
its  sphere.  If  sovereignty  cannot  be  thus  divided,  the  political 
system  of  the  United  States  is  a  chimera,  mocking  the  vain  pre- 
tensions of  human  wisdom.     If  it  can  be  so  divided,  the  system 


(J2  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

ought  to  have  a  fair  opportunity  of  fulfilling  the  wishes  and  ex 
pectations  which  cling  to  the  experiment. 

Nothing  can  be  more  clear  than  that  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  has  created  a  Government,  in  as  strict  a  sense  of 
the  term  as  the  governments  of  the  States  created  by  their  re- 
spective constitutions.  The  Federal  Government  has,  like  the 
State  governments,  its  Legislative,  its  Executive,  and  its  Judici- 
ary departments.  It  has,  like  them,  acknowledged  cases  in  which 
the  powers  of  these  departments  are  to  operate;  and  the  ope- 
ration is  to  be  directly  on  persons  and  things  in  the  one  Gov- 
ernment as  in  the  others.  If  in  some  cases  the  jurisdiction  is 
concurrent  as  it  is  in  others  exclusive,  this  is  one  of  the  features 
constituting  the  peculiarity  of  the  system. 

In  forming  this  compound  scheme  of  Government,  it  was  im- 
possible to  lose  sight  of  the  question,  What  was  to  be  done  in 
the  event  of  controversies,  which  could  not  fail  to  occur,  con- 
cerning the  partition  line  between  the  powers  belonging  to  the 
Federal  and  to  the  State  governments?  That  some  provision 
ought  to  be  made,  was  as  obvious  and  as  essential  as  the  task 
itself  was  difficult  and  delicate. 

That  the  final  decision  of  such  controversies,  if  left  to  each 
of  the  thirteen,  now  twenty-four,  members  of  the  Union,  must 
produce  a  different  Constitution  and  different  laws  in  the  States, 
was  certain;  and  that  such  differences  must  be  destructive  of 
the  common  Government  and  of  the  Union  itself,  was  equally 
certain.  The  decision  of  questions  between  the  common  agents 
of  the  whole  and  of  the  parts  could  only  proceed  from  the 
whole — that  is,  from  a  collective,  not  a  separate,  authority  of 
the  parts. 

The  question  then  presenting  itself  could  only  relate  to  the 
least  objectionable  mode  of  providing  for  such  occurrences  under 
the  collective  authority. 

The  provision  immediately  and  ordinarily  relied  on  is  mani- 
festly the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  clothed  as  it  is 
with  a  jurisdiction  "  in  controversies  to  which  the  United  States 
shall  be  a  party,"  the  court  itself  being  so  constituted  as  to  ren- 
der it  independent  and  impartial  in  its  decisions  [see  Federal- 


1830.  LETTERS.  63 

ist,  No.  xxxix,  p.  241;]  while  other  and  ulterior  resorts  would 
remain,  in  the  elective  process,  in  the  hands  of  the  people  them- 
selves, the  joint  constituents  of  the  parties,  and  in  the  provision 
made  by  the  Constitution  for  amending  itself.  All  other  re- 
sorts are  extra  and  ultra  constitutional,  corresponding  to  the 
ultima  ratio  of  nations  renouncing  the  ordinary  relations  of 
peace. 

If  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  be  found  or  deemed 
not  sufficiently  independent  and  impartial  for  the  trust  commit- 
ted to  it,  a  better  tribunal  is  a  desideratum.  But,  whatever 
this  may  be,  it  must  necessarily  derive  its  authority  from  the 
whole,  not  from  the  parts;  from  the  States  in  some  collective, 
not  individual  capacity.  And  as  some  such  tribunal  is  a  vital 
element,  a  sine  qua  non,  in  an  efficient  and  permanent  Govern- 
ment, the  tribunal  existing  must  be  acquiesced  in  until  a  better 
or  more  satisfactory  one  can  be  substituted. 

Although  the  old  idea  of  a  compact  between  the  Government 
and  the  people  be  justly  exploded,  the  idea  of  a  compact  among 
those  who  are  parties  to  a  Government  is  a  fundamental  princi- 
ple of  free  Government. 

The  original  compact  is  the  one  implied  or  presumed,  but  no- 
where reduced  to  writing,  by  which  a  people  agree  to  form  one 
society.  The  next  is  a  compact,  here  for  the  first  time  reduced 
to  writing,  by  which  the  people  in  their  social  state  agree  to  a 
Government  over  them.  These  two  compacts  may  be  consid- 
ered as  blended  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  which 
recognises  a  union  or  society  of  States,  and  makes  it  the  basis 
of  the  Government  formed  by  the  parties  to  it. 

It  is  the  nature  and  essence  of  a  compact,  that  it  is  equally 
obligatory  on  the  parties  to  it,  and,  of  course,  that  no  one  of 
them  can  be  liberated  therefrom  without  the  consent  of  the 
others,  or  such  a  violation  or  abuse  of  it  by  the  others  as  will 
amount  to  a  dissolution  of  the  compact. 

Applying  this  view  of  the  subject  to  a  single  community,  it 
results,  that  the  compact  being  between  the  individuals  com- 
posing it,  no  individual  or  set  of  individuals  can  at  pleasure 
break  off  and  set  up  for  themselves,  without  such  a  violation  of 


64  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

the  compact  as  absolves  them  from  its  obligations.  It  follows, 
at  the  same  time,  that,  in  the  event  of  such  a  violation,  the  suf- 
fering party,  rather  than  longer  yield  a  passive  obedience,  may 
justly  shake  off  the  yoke,  and  can  only  be  restrained  from  the 
attempt  by  a  want  of  physical  strength  for  the  purpose.  The 
case  of  individuals  expatriating  themselves,  that  is,  leaving 
their  country  in  its  territorial  as  well  as  its  social  and  political 
sense,  may  well  be  deemed  a  reasonable  privilege,  or,  rather,  as 
a  right  impliedly  reserved.  And  even  in  this  case,  equitable 
conditions  have  been  annexed  to  the  right,  which  qualify  the 
exercise  of  it.* 

Applying  a  like  view  of  the  subject  to  the  case  of  the  United 
States,  it  results,  that  the  compact  being  among  individuals  as 
imbodied  into  States,  no  State  can  at  pleasure  release  itself 
therefrom  and  set  up  for  itself.  The  compact  can  only  be  dis- 
solved by  the  consent  of  the  other  parties,  or  by  usurpations  or 
abuses  of  power  justly  having  that  effect.  It  will  hardly  be 
contended  that  there  is  anything  in  the  terms  or  nature  of  the 
compact  authorizing  a  party  to  dissolve  it  at  pleasure. 

It  is,  indeed,  inseparable  from  the  nature  of  a  compact,  that 
there  is  as  much  right  on  one  side  to  expound  it,  and  to  insist 
on  its  fulfilment  according  to  that  exposition,  as  there  is  on  the 
other  so  to  expound  it  as  to  furnish  a  release  from  it;  and  that 
an  attempt  to  annul  it  by  one  of  the  parties  may  present  to  the 
other  an  option  of  acquiescing  in  the  annulment,  or  of  prevent- 
ing it,  as  the  one  or  the  other  course  may  be  deemed  the  lesser 
evil.  This  is  a  consideration  which  ought  deeply  to  impress 
itself  on  every  patriotic  mind,  as  the  strongest  dissuasion  from 
unnecessary  approaches  to  such  a  crisis.  What  would  be  the 
condition  of  the  States  attached  to  the  Union  and  its  Govern- 
ment, and  regarding  both  as  essential  to  their  well-being,  if  a 
State  placed  in  the  midst  of  them  were  to  renounce  its  federal 
obligations,  and  erect  itself  into  an  independent  and  alien  na- 
tion? Could  the  States  north  and  south  of  Virginia,  Pennsyl- 
vania, or  New  York,  or  of  some  other  States,  however  small, 

*  See  the  Virginia  statute. 


1830.  LETTERS.  G5 

remain  associated  and  enjoy  their  present  happiness,  if  geograph- 
ically, politically,  and  practically  thrown  apart  by  such  a  breach 
in  the  chain  which  unites  their  interests  and  binds  them  to- 
gether as  neighbours  and  fellow-citizens?  It  could  not  be. 
The  innovation  would  be  fatal  to  the  Federal  Government,  fa- 
tal to  the  Union,  and  fatal  to  the  hopes  of  liberty  and  humanity, 
and  presents  a  catastrophe  at  which  all  ought  to  shudder. 

Without  identifying  the  case  of  the  United  States  with  that 
of  individual  States,  there  is  at  least  an  instructive  analogy  be- 
tween them.  What  would  be  the  condition  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  of  Massachusetts,  or  of  Pennsylvania,  for  example,  if  por- 
tions containing  their  great  commercial  cities,  invoking  original 
rights  as  paramount  to  social  and  constitutional  compacts, 
should  erect  themselves  into  distinct  and  absolute  sovereign- 
ties ?  In  so  doing  they  would  do  no  more,  unless  justified  by 
an  intolerable  oppression,  than  would  be  done  by  an  individual 
State,  as  a  portion  of  the  Union,  in  separating  itself,  without  a 
like  cause,  from  the  other  portions.  Nor  would  greater  evils 
be  inflicted  by  such  a  mutilation  of  a  State  on  some  of  its  parts, 
than  might  be  felt  by  some  of  the  States  from  a  separation  of 
its  neighbours  into  absolute  and  alien  sovereignties. 

Even  in  the  case  of  a  mere  league  between  nations  absolutely 
independent  of  each  other,  neither  party  has  a  right  to  dissolve 
it  at  pleasure,  each  having  an  equal  right  to  expound  its  obli- 
gations, and  neither,  consequently,  a  greater  right  to  pronounce 
the  compact  void  than  the  other  has  to  insist  on  the  mutual  ex- 
ecution of  it.  [See,  in  Mr.  Jefferson's  volumes,  his  letters  to 
J.  M.,  Mr.  Monroe,  and  Col.  Carrington.] 

Having  suffered  my  pen  to  take  this  ramble  over  a  subject 
engaging  so  much  of  your  attention,  I  will  not  withhold  the 
notes  made  by  it  from  your  perusal.  But  being  aware  that, 
without  more  development  and  precision,  they  may  in  some  in- 
stances be  liable  to  misapprehension  or  misconstruction,  I  will 
ask  the  favour  of  you  to  return  the  letter  after  it  has  passed 
under  your  partial  and  confidential  eye. 

I  have  made  no  secret  of  my  surprise  and  sorrow  at  the  pro- 
ceedings in  South  Carolina,  which  are  understood  to  assert  a 

VOL.  iv.  5 


(56  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

right  to  annul  the  acts  of  Congress  within  the  State,  and  even 
to  secede  from  the  Union  itself.  But  I  am  unwilling  to  enter 
the  political  field  with  the  "  tclum  imbelle"  which  alone  I  could 
wield.  The  task  of  combating  such  unhappy  aberrations  be- 
longs to  other  hands.  A  man  whose  years  have  but  readied 
the  canonical  three-score-and-ten  (and  mine  are  much  beyond 
the  number)  should  distrust  himself,  whether  distrusted  by  his 
friends  or  not,  and  should  never  forget  that  his  arguments, 
whatever  they  may  be,  will  be  answered  by  allusions  to  the  date 
of  his  birth. 

With  affectionate  respects, 


TO   ROBERT   LEE. 

Montpellier,  February  22,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  your  letter  of  the  12th.  The 
motive  and  the  matter  of  it  might  claim  for  the  request  it  makes 
a  degree  of  attention  from  which  my  age,  now  approaching  the 
eightieth  year,  may  not  only  excuse  but  properly  restrain  me. 
Under  any  circumstances,  I  ought  not  to  offer  opinions  on  such 
subjects  without  the  reasonings  on  which  they  rest,  and  this, 
under  existing  circumstances,  is  a  task  which  I  wish  not  to  un- 
dertake. 

The  question  of  re-eligibility  in  the  case  of  a  President  of  the 
United  States  admits  of  rival  views,  and  is  the  more  delicate 
because  it  cannot  be  decided  with  equal  lights  from  actual  ex- 
periment. In  general,  it  may  be  observed,  that  the  evils  most 
complained  of  are  less  connected  with  that  particular  question 
than  with  the  process  of  electing  the  Chief  Magistrate,  and  the 
powers  vested  in  him.  Among  these,  the  appointing  power  is 
the  most  operative  in  relation  to  the  purity  of  Government  and 
the  tranquillity  of  republican  Government,  and  it  is  not  easy  to 
find  a  depository  for  it  more  free  from  the  dangers  of  abuse. 
The  powers  and  patronage  of  a  Chief  Magistrate,  whether 
elected  for  a  shorter  term  and  re-eligible  for  a  second,  or  for  a 


183ft.  LETTERS.  67 

longer,  without  that  capacity,  might  not,  in  their  effect,  be  very 
materially  different,  though  the  difference  might  not  be  unim- 
portant. 

It  should  not  be  forgotten  that  many  inconveniences  are  in- 
separable from  the  peculiarity  of  a  federal  system  of  Govern- 
ment, while  such  a  Government  is  essential  to  the  complete  suc- 
cess of  republicanism  in  any  form. 

Were  I  not  aware  that  there  is  nothing  in  these  brief  and 
broken  ideas  that  could  suggest  a  public  use  of  them,  I  should 
not  fail  to  combine  an  intimation  against  it,  with  the  return  of 
my  good  wishes  and  friendly  salutations,  which  I  pray  you  to 
accept. 


TO   MR.    MCDUFFIE. 


J.  Madison  presents  his  best  respects  to  Mr.  McDuffie  and  re- 
turns his  thanks  for  the  copy  of  the  "Report  on  the  state  of  the 
Public  Finances,"  politely  sent  him. 

A  perusal  of  the  Report  has  left  him  under  a  just  impression 
of  the  marked  ability  with  which  it  is  drawn  up.  He  must  be 
permitted,  at  the  same  time,  to  say,  that  the  theoretic  views 
taken  of  some  branches  of  the  subject  discussed,  particularly 
that  of  a  Tariff  for  the  encouragement  of  domestic  manufactures, 
appear  to  be  too  exclusive  of  the  restrictions  and  exceptions  re- 
quired by  more  practical  views  of  it.  The  unqualified  theory 
of  "  Let  us  alone,"  presupposes  a  perpetual  peace,  and  universal 
freedom  of  commerce  among  nations,  making  them,  in  certain 
economical  respects,  but  one  and  the  same  nation.  A  nation 
that  does  not  provide  in  some  measure  against  the  effect  of 
wars,  and  the  policy  of  other  nations,  on  its  commerce  and  man- 
ufactures, necessarily  exposes  these  interests  to  the  caprice  and 
casualty  of  events.  The  extent  and  the  mode  of  provision 
proper  to  be  made  are  fair  questions  for  examination,  and  un- 
avoidable sources  of  conflicting  opinions,  not  to  say  possible 
sources  of  oppressive  decisions. 

Montpellier,  Mar.  30,  1830. 


G8  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 


TO   JARED   SPARKS. 

MoNTPKr.LiKR,  April  8th,  1830. 

DR  Sir, — Your  favor  of  March  8  came  duly  to  hand,  and  I 
congratulate  you  on  your  success  at  London  and  Paris  in  ob- 
taining materials  nowhere  else  to  be  found,  and  so  essential  to 
the  history  of  our  Revolution. 

I  have  been  looking  over  such  of  the  letters  of  General  Wash- 
ington to  me,  as  do  not  appear  on  his  files.  They  amount  to  28, 
besides  some  small  confidential  notes.  Most  of  the  letters  are 
of  some  importance;  some  of  them  arc  peculiarly  delicate,  and 
some  equally  important  and  delicate.  To  make  extracts  from 
them  is  a  task  I  should  not  wish  to  undertake.  To  forward  to 
you  the  whole  for  that  purpose  through  the  hazards  of  the  mail 
is  liable  to  the  objection,  that,  as  no  copies  exist,  a  loss  of  the 
originals  would  be  fatal.  Under  these  circumstances  it  occurs 
that  you  may  be  able  to  spare  a  few  days  for  a  trip  from  Wash 
ington  to  Montpelier,  where  you  can  review  the  whole,  in  afford 
ing  an  opportunity  for  which  I  shall  think  myself  justified  by 
the  confidence  reposed  in  you  by  those  to  whom  the  memory  of 
Washington  was  most  dear,  and  by  the  entire  confidence  felt 
by  myself.  If,  on  examining  the  papers,  you  should  find  more 
than  you  can  conveniently  extract,  I  will  have  the  copies 
made  of  what  you  may  mark  for  the  purpose,  and  endeavor  to 
procure  for  them  some  unexceptionable  conveyance. 

Until  I  learn  whether  I  shall  have  the  pleasure  of  seeing  you, 
I  retain  the  packet  received  through  Col.  Storrow;  which  ig 
ready  to  be  returned,  either  personally  or  through  the  channel 
you  pointed  out. 


TO  MRS.   E.    COOLIDGE. 

Montpki,liek,  Ap1  8th,  1830. 

My  dear  Madam, — Your  acceptable  favor  of  March  20th 
came  duly  to  hand,  and  with  it  the  anticipated  review  of  the 
published  correspondence  of  your  grandfather.     The  author  of 


1830.  LETTERS.  69 

the  review  has  given  evidence  not  only  of  a  candid  mind  res- 
cued from  preconceived  error,  but  of  a  critical  judgment  and 
an  accomplished  pen.  The  light  which  pierced  the  film  over 
his  eyes  cannot  fail  to  produce  a  like  revolution  in  other  minds 
equally  capable  of  comprehending  the  various  merits  which 
give  lustre  to  the  volumes  reviewed,  and  incapable  of  withhold- 
ing the  tribute  due  to  them. 

The  reviewer  has,  I  observe,  taken  particular  notice  of  a 
letter  to  me,  which  presents  a  view,  at  once  original  and  pro- 
found, of  the  relations  between  one  generation  and  another.  It 
must  be  admitted,  as  he  remarks,  that  there  would  be  difficulties 
in  reducing  it  fully  to  practice.  But  it  affords  a  practical  les- 
son well  according  with  the  policy  of  free  nations.  Having 
lately  found,  among  other  fugitive  scraps,  one  in  which  the  sub- 
ject was  contemplated,  I  venture  to  inclose  a  copy  of  it.  It 
was  printed  many  years  ago,  as  its  date  shews;  but  I  am  not 
able  to  furnish  any  other  than  a  manuscript  copy. 

Mrs.  Madison,  whose  aifection  for  you  cannot  change,  bids 
me  say  that  she  will  only  permit  this  small  expression  of  it 
through  me.  For  myself,  my  dear  madam,  I  pray  you  to  be  as- 
sured that  her  feelings  are  equally  mine,  and  that  they  will  al- 
ways be  enlivened  by  your  relation  to  a  friend  whose  memory 
can  never  cease  to  be  dear  to  me.  We  unite  in  offering  our 
best  respects  to  Mr.  Coolidge,  and  in  every  wish  for  the  happi- 
ness of  you  both. 


TO   EDWARD    EVERETT. 

MONTPELLIER,  Ap1  8,   1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  consult  the  wishes  of  Mr.  Sparks  in  making 
you  a  channel  of  communication  with  him.  Should  he  not  have 
arrived  at  Washington,  be  so  good  as  to  retain  the  inclosed 
letter  till  you  can  deliver  it  in  person,  or  till  otherwise  advised 
by  him  or  by  me. 

I  take  this  occasion,  sir,  to  thank  you  for  the  copies  of  Mr. 
Webster's  and  Mr.  Sprague's  late  speeches.     They  do  honor, 


70  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

both  of  thorn,  to  the  national  councils.  Mr.  Webster's  is  such 
as  was  to  be  expected.  To  Mr.  Sprague's  I  cannot  apply  the 
same  remark,  not  having  had  the  same  previous  knowledge  of 
his  Parliamentary  powers. 

If  the  able  debates  on  Mr.  Foot's  resolution  have  thrown 
lights  on  some  constitutional  questions,  they  shew  errors  which 
have  their  sources  in  an  oblivion  of  explanatory  circumstances, 
and  in  the  silent  innovations  of  time  on  the  meaning  of  words 
and  phrases. 


TO   PROFESSOR   TUCKER. 

Montpelmer,  Api  30.  1830. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  yours  of  March  29,  in  which  you  in 
timate  your  purpose  of  undertaking  a  biography  of  Mr.  JefTer 
son.  It  will  be  a  good  subject  in  good  hands;  and  I  wish  you 
may  succeed  in  procuring  the  means  of  doing  full  justice  to  both. 
I  know  not  that  I  shall  be  able  to  make  any  important  contri- 
butions. I  was  a  stranger  to  Mr.  Jefferson  till  he  took  his  seat, 
in  1776,  in  the  first  Legislature  under  the  Constitution  of  Vir- 
ginia, formed  in  that  year.  The  acquaintance  with  him  thou 
made  was  very  slight.  During  a  part  of  the  time  ho  was  Gov- 
ernor I  was  a  member  of  the  Council.  Our  acquaintance  then 
became  intimate,  and  a  friendship  took  place  which  was  one  for 
life. 

From  this  sketch  you  will  perceive  that  I  can  know  nothing 
of  the  first  half  of  his  career;  and  during  the  other  half  the  ma- 
terials for  a  biographer  are  to  be  found  chiefly  in  the  public 
archives,  and  among  his  voluminous  manuscripts,  partly  in  print, 
partly  in  the  hands  of  his  legatee.  All  these,  witli  the  connect- 
ing links  and  appropriate  reflections,  cannot  fail  to  supply  what 
will  make  a  work  highly  interesting  in  itself,  and  be  a  rich  offer- 
ing to  a  future  historian. 

I  hope  you  will  also  find  a  due  portion  of  the  anecdotic  spices 
and  gems  with  which  you  will  well  know  how  to  sprinkle  such 
a  work.     Should  any  occur  to  me  or  be  recalled  by  particular 


1830.  LETTERS.  71 

enquiries,  it  will  give  me  great  pleasure  to  comply  with  your 
wishes.  Mr.  Jefferson's  letters  to  me  amount  to  hundreds;  but 
they  have  not  been  looked  into  for  a  long  time,  with  the  exeep 
tion  of  a  few  of  latter  dates.  As  he  kept  copies  of  all  his  let- 
ters throughout  the  period,  the  originals  of  those  to  me  exist, 
of  course,  elsewhere. 

My  eye  fell  lately  on  the  enclosed  paper.  It  is  already  in  ob- 
scurity, and  may  soon  be  in  oblivion.  The  Ceracchi  named 
was  an  artist  celebrated  by  his  genius,  and  who  was  thought 
a  rival,  in  embryo,  to  Canova,  and  doomed  to  the  guillotine  as 
the  author  or  patron,  guilty  or  suspected,  of  the  infernal  ma- 
chine for  destroying  Bonaparte.  I  knew  him  well,  having  been 
a  lodger  in  the  same  house  with  him,  and  much  teased  by  his 
eager  hopes,  on  which  I  constantly  threw  cold  water,  of  obtain- 
ing the  aid  of  Congress  for  his  grand  project.  Having  failed 
in  this  chance,  he  was  advised  by  me  and  others  to  make  the 
experiment  of  subscriptions,  with  the  most  auspicious  names 
heading  the  list;  and  considering  the  general  influence  of  Wash- 
ington and  the  particular  influence  of  Hamilton  on  the  corps  of 
speculators  then  suddenly  enriched  by  the  funding  system,  the 
prospect  was  encouraging;  but  just  as  the  circular  address  was 
about  to  be  despatched,  it  was  put  into  his  head  that  the  scheme 
was  merely  to  get  rid  of  his  importunities,  and  being  of  the  ge- 
nus irritabile,  he  suddenly  went  off  in  anger  and  digust,  leav- 
ing behind  him  heavy  drafts  on  General  Washington,  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson, &c.,  <fec,  for  the  busts,  &c,  he  had  presented  to  them. 
His  drafts  were  not  the  effect  of  avarice,  but  of  his  wants,  all 
his  resources  having  been  exhausted  in  the  tedious  pursuit  of 
his  object.  He  was  an  enthusiastic  worshipper  of  Liberty  and 
Fame;  and  his  whole  soul  was  bent  on  securing  the  latter  by 
rearing  a  monument  to  the  former,  which  he  considered  as  per- 
sonified in  the  American  Republic.  Attempts  were  made  to 
engage  him  for  a  statue  of  General  W.,  but  he  would  not  stoop 
to  that. 


72  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

TO   E.    EVERETT. 

Montpellier,  April      ,  1880. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  favour  of  the  11th  was  duly  received.  I 
had  noticed  the  stress  laid  iu  a  late  debate  on  the  proceedings 
of  the  Virginia  Legislature  in  '98-'99  as  supporting  the  nullify- 
ing doctrine,  so  called,  and  of  a  frequent  reference  also  to  my 
participation  in  those  proceedings.  But  although  regretting 
the  erroneous  views  taken  of  them,  and  not  making  a  secret  of 
my  opinions,  I  was  unwilling  to  obtrude  any  public  explana- 
tions for  reasons  which  may  occur;  for  two,  more  particularly: 
1.  That  other  errors  were  occasionally  observed  in  other  cases 
in  which  I  was  referred  to  as  a  party  or  witness,  and  an  inter- 
position in  one  case  might  be  thought  to  require  it  equally  in 
others.  2.  That  I  could  not  be  unaware  that  my  voluntary  ap- 
pearance before  the  public  on  such  occasions  would  produce  ad- 
versary comments,  obliging  me  either  to  surrender  a  good  cause 
or  entangle  myself  in  controversies  against  which  my  age  was 
a  warning.  Before  I  received  your  letter  I  had  been  drawn, 
by  a  request  from  a  distinguished  advocate*  of  the  nullifying 
doctrine  and  some  others  associated  with  it,  into  a  sketch  of  my 
views  of  them,  and  feeling  a  like  obligation  to  respect  your  wish, 
I  take  the  liberty  of  fulfilling  it  in  the  way  most  convenient  to 
myself,  by  inclosing  a  copy,  by  a  borrowed  pen,  of  as  much  of 
that  communication  as  will  answer  the  purpose.  I  am  sensible, 
at  the  same  time,  that  there  may  be  some  awkwardness  in  this 
course,  especially  as  I  know  not,  as  yet,  the  reception  given  to 
the  communication,  nor  the  degree  in  which  the  correspondence 
may  be  regarded  as  confidential.  I  wrill  ask  the  favour  of  you, 
therefore,  to  let  the  present  be  so  understood.    I  thank  you,  sir, 

for  the  copy  of  Mr.  Clayton's  speech.     It  certainly  places 

with  others  which  have  justly  at- 


tracted the  flattering  notice  of  the  public. 

No  notice  has  been  taken  in  the  inclosed  paper  of  the  fact 
that  the  present  charge  of  usurpations  and  abuses  of  power  is . 

*  Gen.  R.  Y.  Hayne. 


1830.  LETTERS.  73 

not  that  they  are  measures  of  the  Government  violating  the 
will  of  the  constituents,  as  was  the  case  with  the  alien  and  se- 
ditious acts,  but  that  they  are  measures  of  a  majority  of  the 
constituents  themselves,  oppressing  the  minority  through  the 
forms  of  the  Government.  This  distinction  would  lead  to  very 
different  views  of  the  topics  under  discussion.  It  is  connected 
with  the  fundamental  principles  of  Republican  Government, 
and  with  the  question  of  comparative  danger  of  oppressive 
majorities  from  the  sphere  and  structure  of  the  General  Gov- 
ernment and  from  those  of  the  particular  Governments. 


TO   M.   L.   HURLBERT. 

Montpellier,  May,  1830. 

I  received,  sir,  though  not  exactly  in  due  time,  your  letter  of 
April  25,  with  a  copy  of  your  pamphlet,  on  the  subject  of  which 
you  request  my  opinions. 

With  a  request  opening  so  wide  a  field,  I  could  not  undertake 
a  full  compliance  without  forgetting  the  age  at  which  it  finds 
me,  and  that  I  have  other  engagements  precluding  such  a  task. 
I  must  hope,  therefore,  you  will  accept,  in  place  of  it,  a  few  re- 
marks, which,  though  not  adapted  to  the  use  you  had  contem- 
plated, may  manifest  my  respect  for  your  wishes  and  for  the 
subject  which  prompted  them. 

The  pamphlet  certainly  evinces  a  very  strong  pen,  and  talents 
adequate  to  the  discussion  of  constitutional  topics  of  the  most 
interesting  class.  But  in  doing  it  this  justice,  and  adding  with 
pleasure  that  it  contains  much  matter  with  which  my  views  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  accord,  I  must  add,  also, 
that  it  contains  views  of  the  Constitution  from  which  mine 
widely  differ. 

I  refer  particularly  to  the  construction  you  seem  to  put  on 
the  introductory  clause,  "  we  the  people,"  &c,  and  on  the  phrases 
"common  defence  and  general  welfare."  Either  of  these,  if 
taken  as  a  measure  of  the  powers  of  the  General  Government, 
would  supersede  the  elaborate  specifications  which  compose  the 


74  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

body  of  the  instrument,  in  contravention  to  the  fairest  rules  of 
interpretation.  And  if  I  am  to  answer  your  appeal  to  me  as  a 
witness,  I  must  say  that  the  real  measure  of  the  powers  meant 
to  be  granted  to  Congress  by  the  Convention,  as  I  understood 
and  believe,  is  to  be  sought  in  the  specifications,  to  be  expounded, 
indeed,  not  with  the  strictness  applied  to  an  ordinary  statute 
by  a  court  of  law,  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  with  a  latitude  that, 
under  the  name  of  means  for  carrying  into  execution  a  limited 
Government,  would  transform  it  into  a  Government  without 
limits. 

But  whatever  respect  may  be  thought  due  to  the  intention  of 
the  Convention  which  prepared  and  proposed  the  Constitution, 
as  presumptive  evidence  of  the  general  understanding  at  the 
time  of  the  language  used,  it  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  the  only 
authoritative  intentions  were  those  of  the  people  of  the  States, 
as  expressed  through  the  Conventions  which  ratified  the  Con- 
stitution. 

That  in  a  Constitution  so  new  and  so  complicated,  there 
should  be  occasional  difficulties  and  differences  in  the  practical 
expositions  of  it,  can  surprise  no  one;  and  this  must  continue 
to  be  the  case,  as  happens  to  new  laws  on  complex  subjects,  until 
a  course  of  practice  of  sufficient  uniformity  and  duration  to 
carry  with  it  the  public  sanction  shall  settle  doubtful  or  con- 
tested meanings. 

As  there  are  legal  rules  for  interpreting  laws,  there  must  be 
analogous  rules  for  interpreting  constitutions;  and  among  the 
obvious  and  just  guides  applicable  to  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  may  be  mentioned — 

1.  The  evils  and  defects  for  curing  which  the  Constitution 
was  called  for  and  introduced. 

2.  The  comments  prevailing  at  the  time  it  was  adopted. 

3.  The  early,  deliberate,  and  continued  practice  under  the 
Constitution,  as  preferable  to  constructions  adapted  on  the  spur 
of  occasions,  and  subject  to  the  vicissitudes  of  party  or  personal 
ascendencies. 

On  recurring  to  the  origin  of  the  Constitution  and  examining 
the  structure  of  the  Government,  we  perceive  that  it  is  neither 


1830.  LETTERS.  .  75 

a  Federal  Government,  created  by  the  State  governments,  like 
the  revolutionary  Congress,  nor  a  consolidated  Government  (as 
that  term  is  now  applied.)  created  by  the  people  of  the  United 
States  as  one  community,  and,  as  such,  acting  by  a  numerical 
majority  of  the  whole. 

The  facts  of  the  case  which  must  decide  its  true  character,  a 
character  without  a  prototype,  are,  that  the  Constitution  was 
created  by  the  people,  but  by  the  people  as  composing  distinct 
States,  and  acting  by  a  majority  in  each;  that,  being  derived 
from  the  same  source  as  the  constitutions  of  the  States,  it  lias 
within  each  State  the  same  authority  as  the  constitution  of  the 
State,  and  is  as  much  a  constitution,  in  the  strict  sense  of  the 
term,  as  the  constitution  of  the  State;  that,  being  a  compact 
among  the  States  in  their  highest  sovereign  capacity,  and  con- 
stituting the  people  thereof  one  people  for  certain  purposes,  it  is 
not  revocable  or  alterable  at  the  will  of  the  States  individually, 
as  the  constitution  of  a  State  is  revocable  and  alterable  at  its 
individual  will: 

That  the  sovereign  or  supreme  powers  of  government  are  di- 
vided into  the  separate  depositories  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  and  the  governments  of  the  individual  States: 

That  the  Government  of  the  United  States  is  a  government, 
in  as  strict  a  sense  of  the  term,  as  the  governments  of  the  States; 
being,  like  them,  organized  into  a  Legislative.  Executive,  and 
Judiciary  department,  operating,  like  them,  directly  on  persons 
and  things,  and  having,  like  them,  the  command  of  a  physical 
force  for  executing  the  powers  committed  to  it: 

That  the  supreme  powers  of  government  being  divided  be- 
tween different  governments,  and  controversies  as  to  the  land- 
marks of  jurisdiction  being  unavoidable,  provision  for  a  peace- 
able and  authoritative  decision  of  them  was  obviously  essential: 

That,  to  leave  this  decision  to  the  States,  numerous  as  they 
were,  and  with  a  prospective  increase,  would  evidently  result  in 
conflicting  decisions  subversive  of  the  common  Government  and 
of  the  Union  itself: 

That,  according  to  the  actual  provision  against  such  calam- 
ities, the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States  are  de- 


76  •  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

clarcd  to  be  paramount  to  those  of  the  individual  States,  and 
an  appellate  supremacy  is  vested  in  the  judicial  power  of  the 
United  States : 

That,  as  safeguards  against  usurpations  and  abuses  of  power 
by  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  the  members  of  its 
Legislative  and  the  head  of  its  Executive  department  are  eligi- 
ble by,  and  responsible  to,  the  people  of  the  States  or  the  Legis- 
latures of  the  States;  and  as  well  the  Judicial  as  the  Executive 
functionaries,  including  the  head,  are  impeachable  by  the  Rep- 
resentatives of  the  people  in  one  branch  of  the  Legislature  of 
the  United  States,  and  triable  by  the  Representatives  of  the 
States  in  the  other  branch  : 

States  can,  through  forms  of  the  constitutional  elective  pro- 
visions, control  the  General  Government.  This  has  no  agency 
in  electing  State  governments,  and  can  only  control  them 
through  the  functionaries,  particularly  the  Judiciary,  of  the 
General  Government : 

That  in  case  of  an  experienced  inadequacy  of  these  provis- 
ions, an  ulterior  resort  is  provided  in  amendments  attainable 
by  an  intervention  of  the  States,  which  may  better  adapt  the 
Constitution  for  the  purposes  of  its  creation. 

Should  all  these  provisions  fail,  and  a  degree  of  oppression 
ensue,  rendering  insistence  and  revolution  a  lesser  evil  than  a 
longer  passive  obedience,  there  can  remain  but  the  ultima  ratio, 
applicable  to  extreme  cases,  whether  between  nations  or  the 
component  parts  of  them. 

Such,  sir,  I  take  to  be  an  outline  view,  though  an  imperfect 
one,  of  the  political  system  presented  in  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States.  Whether  it  be  the  best  system  that  might  have 
been  devised,  or  what  the  improvements  that  might  be  made  in 
it,  are  questions  equally  beyond  the  scope  of  your  letter  and 
that  of  the  answer,  with  which  I  pray  you  to  accept  my  respects 
and  good  wishes. 


1830.  LETTERS.  77 


TO   JAMES   HILLHOUSE. 

Montpei.lieb,  May — ,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  10th  instant, 
with  the  pamphlet  containing  the  proposed  amendments  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  on  which  you  request  my 
opinion  and  remarks. 

Whatever  pleasure  might  be  felt  in  a  fuller  compliance  with 
your  request,  I  must  avail  myself  of  the  pleas  of  the  age  I  have 
readied,  and  of  the  control  of  other  engagements,  for  not  ven- 
turing on  more  than  the  few  observations  suggested  by  a  pe- 
rusal of  what  you  have  submitted  to  the  public. 

I  readily  acknowledge  tl  e  ingenuity  which  devised  the  plan 
you  recommend,  and  the  strength  of  reasoning  with  which  you 
support  it.  I  cannot,  however,  but  regard  it  as  liable  to  the 
following  remarks : 

1.  The  first  that  occurs  is,  that  the  large  States  would  not 
exchange  the  proportional  agency  they  now  have  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  Chief  Magistrate,  for  a  mode  placing  the  largest 
and  smallest  States  on  a  perfect  equality  in  that  cardinal  trans- 
action. New  York  has  in  it,  even  now,  more  than  thirteen 
times  the  weight  of  several  of  the  States,  and  other  States  ac- 
cording to  their  magnitudes  would  decide  on  the  change  with 
correspondent  calculations  and  feelings. 

The  difficulty  of  reconciling  the  larger  States  to  the  equality 
in  the  Senate,  is  known  to  have  been  the  most  threatening  that 
was  encountered  in  framing  the  Constitution.  It  is  known, 
also,  that  the  powers  committed  to  that  body,  comprehending, 
as  they  do,  Legislative,  Executive,  and  Judicial  functions,  was 
among  the  most  serious  objections,  with  many,  to  the  adoption 
of  the  Constitution. 

2.  As  the  President  elect  would  generally  be  without  any 
previous  evidence  of  national  confidence,  and  have  been  in  re- 
sponsible relations  only  to  a  particular  State,  there  might  be 
danger  of  State  partialities,  and  a  certainty  of  injurious  suspi- 
cions of  them. 

3.  Considering  the  ordinary  composition  of  the  Senate,  and 


73  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

the  number  (in  a  little  time  nearly  fifty)  out  of  which  a  single 
one  was  to  be  taken  by  pure  chance,  it  must  often  happen  that 
the  winner  of  the  prize  would  want  some  of  the  qualities  neces- 
sary to  command  the  respect  of  the  nation,  and  possibly  be 
marked  witli  some  of  an  opposite  tendency.  On  a  review  of  the 
composition  of  that  body,  through  the  successive  periods  of  its 
existence  (antecedent  to  the  present,  which  may  be  an  excep- 
tion,) how  often  will  names  present  themselves  which  would  be 
seen  with  mortified  feelings  at  the  head  of  the  nation!  It  might 
happen,  it  is  true,  that,  in  the  choice  of  Senators,  an  eventual 
elevation  to  that  important  trust  might  produce  more  circum- 
spection in  the  State  Legislatures.  But  so  remote  a  contingency 
could  not  be  expected  to  have  any  great  influence;  besides  that, 
there  might  be  States  not  furnishing  at  the  time  characters 
which  would  satisfy  the  pride  and  inspire  the  confidence  of  the 
States  and  of  the  People. 

4.  A  President  not  appointed  by  the  nation,  and  without  the 
weight  derived  from  its  selection  and  confidence,  could  not  af- 
ford the  advantage  expected  from  the  qualified  negative  on  the 
acts  of  the  Legislative  branch  of  the  Government.  He  might 
either  shrink  from  the  delicacy  of  such  an  interposition,  or  it 
might  be  overruled  with  too  little  hesitation  by  the  body  checked 
in  its  career. 

5.  In  the  vicissitudes  of  party,  adverse  views  and  feelings  will 
exist  between  the  Senate  and  President.  Under  the  amend- 
ments proposed,  a  spirit  of  opposition  in  the  former  to  the  latter 
would  probably  be  more  frequent  than  heretofore.  In  sucli  a 
state  of  things,  how  apt  might  the  Senate  be  to  embarrass  the 
President,  by  refusing  to  concur  in  the  removal  of  an  obnoxious 
officer !  how  prone  would  be  a  refractory  officer,  having  power- 
ful friends  in  the  Senate,  to  take  shelter  under  that  authority, 
and  bid  defiance  to  the  President!  and,  with  such  discord  and 
anarchy  in  the  Executive  department,  how  impaired  would  be 
the  security  for  a  due  execution  of  the  laws! 

6.  On  the  supposition  that  the  above  objection  would  be  over- 
balanced by  the  advantage  of  reducing  the  power  and  the  pat- 
ronage now  attached  to  the  Presidential  office,  it  has  generally 


1830.  LETTERS.  79 

been  admitted,  that  the  heads  of  departments  at  least,  who  are 
at  once  the  associates  and  the  organs  of  the  Chief  Magistrate, 
ought  to  be  well  disposed  towards  him,  and  not  independent  of 
him.  What  would  be  the  situation  of  the  President,  and  what 
might  be  the  effect  on  the  Executive  business,  if  those  immedi- 
ately around  him,  and  in  daily  consultation  with  him,  could, 
however  adverse  to  him  in  their  feelings  and  their  views,  be 
fastened  upon  him  by  a  Senate  disposed  to  take  side  with  them? 
The  harmony  so  expedient  between  the  President  and  heads 
of  departments,  and  among  the  latter  themselves,  has  been  too 
liable  to  interruption  under  an  organization  apparently  so  well 
providing  against  it. 

I  am  aware  that  some  of  these  objections  might  be  mitigated, 
if  not  removed;  but  not,  I  suspect,  in  a  degree  to  render  the 
proposed  modification  of  the  Executive  department  an  eligible 
substitute  for  the  one  existing:  at  the  same  time,  I  am  duly  sen- 
sible of  the  evils  incident  to  the  existing  one,  and  that  a  solid 
improvement  of  it  is  a  desideratum  that  ought  to  be  welcomed 
by  all  enlightened  patriots. 

In  the  mean  time,  I  cannot  feel  all  the  alarm  you  express  at 
the  prospect  for  the  future  as  reflected  from  the  mirror  of  the 
past.  It  will  be  a  rare  case  that  the  Presidential  contest  will 
not  issue  in  a  choice  that  will  not  discredit  the  station,  and  not 
be  acquiesced  in  by  the  unsuccessful  party,  foreseeing,  as  it  must 
do,  the  appeal  to  be  again  made  at  no  very  distant  day  to  the 
will  of  the  nation.  As  long  as  the  country  shall  be  exempt  from 
a  military  force,  powerful  in  itself  and  combined  with  a  power- 
ful faction,  liberty  and  peace  will  find  safeguards  in  the  elective 
resource  and  the  spirit  of  the  people.  The  dangers  which 
threaten  our  political  system,  least  remote,  are  perhaps  of  other 
sorts  and  from  other  sources. 

I  will  only  add  to  these  remarks  what  is,  indeed,  sufficiently 
evident,  that  they  are  too  hasty  and  too  crude  for  any  other 
than  a  private,  and  that  an  indulgent  eye. 

Mrs.  Madison  is  highly  gratified  by  your  kind  expressions 
towards  her,  and  begs  you  to  be  assured  that  she  still  feels  for 
you  that  affectionate  friendship  with  which  you  impressed  her 


80  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

many  years  ago.   Permit  me  to  join  her  in  best  wishes  for  your 
health  and  every  other  happiness. 


TO   EDWARD    LIVINGSTON. 

May  8,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  April  29,  with  a  copy  of  your 
speech,  was  duly  received. 

You  have  succeeded  better  in  your  interpretation  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Virginia  Legislature  in  1798  and  1799  than 
those  who  have  seen  in  them  a  coincidence  with  the  nullifying 
doctrine,  so  called.  This  doctrine,  as  new  to  me  as  it  was  to 
you,  derives  no  support  from  the  best  contemporary  elucida- 
tions of  those  proceedings,  the  debates  on  the  resolutions,  the 
address  of  the  Legislature  to  its  constituents,  and  the  scope  of 
the  objections  made  by  the  Legislatures  of  the  other  States, 
whose  concurrence  in  the  resolutions  was  invited  and  refused. 

The  error  in  the  comments  on  the  Virginia  proceedings  has 
arisen  from  a  failure  to  distinguish  between  what  is  declaratory 
of  opinion  and  what  is  ipso  facto  executory;  between  the  right 
of  the  parties  to  the  Constitution  and  of  a  single  party;  and  be- 
tween resorts  within  the  purview  of  the  Constitution  and  the 
ultima  ratio  which  appeals  from  a  Constitution,  cancelled  by  its 
abuses,  to  original  rights  paramount  to  all  constitutions. 

I  thank  you,  sir,  for  a  communication  which  I  owe  to  your 
politeness  and  your  friendly  recollections.  It  presents  very 
able  views  of  several  very  interesting  subjects,  and  merits  the 
attention  and  perusal  which,  I  doubt  not,  it  will  generally  re- 
ceive. 

Mrs.  Madison,  though  a  stranger,  as  I  am,  to  Mrs.  Living- 
ston and  your  daughter,  joins  in  the  offer  to  them  and  yourself 
of  the  cordial  respects  and  good  wishes  which  we  pray  may  be 
accepted. 


1830.  LETTERS.  31 

TO   GEORGE   M'DUFFTE. 

May  8,  1830. 

Dear  Sib, — I  have  received  a  copy  of  the  late  report  on  the 
Bank  of  the  United  States,  and  finding,  by  the  name  on  the  en- 
velope, that  I  am  indebted  for  the  communication  to  your  polite- 
ness, I  tender  you  my  thanks  for  it.  The  document  contains 
very  interesting  and  instructive  views  of  the  subject,  particu- 
larly of  the  objectionable  features  in  the  substitute  proposed  for 
the  existing  bank. 

I  am  glad  to  find  that  the  report  sanctions  the  sufficiency  of 
the  course  and  character  of  the  precedents  which  I  had  regarded 
as  overruling  individual  judgments  in  expounding  the  Constitu- 
tion. You  are  not  aware,  perhaps,  of  a  circumstance  weighing 
against  the  plea,  that  the  chain  of  precedents  was  broken  by  the 
negative  on  a  bank  bill,  by  the  casting  vote  of  the  President  of 
the  Senate,  given  expressly  on  the  ground  that  the  bill  was  not 
authorized  by  the  Constitution.  The  circumstance  alluded  to 
is,  that  the  equality  of  votes,  which  threw  the  casting  one  on 
the  Chair,  was  the  result  of  a  union  of  a  number  of  members  who 
objected  to  the  expediency  only  of  the  bill,  with  those  who  op- 
posed it  on  constitutional  grounds.  On  a  naked  question  of 
constitutionality,  it  is  understood  that  there  would  have  been  a 
majority  who  made  no  objection  on  that  score;  [the  journals  of 
the  Senate  may  yet  test  the  fact.] 

Will  you  permit  me,  sir,  to  suggest  for  consideration,  whether 
the  report,  [p.  9,  10,]  in  the  position  and  reasoning  applied  to 
the  effect  of  a  change  in  the  quantity,  on  the  value  of  a  currency, 
sufficiently  distinguishes  between  a  specie  currency  and  a  cur- 
rency not  convertible  into  specie  ?  The  latter  being  of  local 
circulation  only,  must,  unless  the  local  use  for  it  increase  or  di- 
minish with  the  increase  or  decrease  of  its  quantity,  be  change- 
able in  its  value  as  the  quantity  of  the  currency  changes.  The 
metals,  on  the  other  hand,  having  a  universal  currency,  would 
not  be  equally  affected  by  local  changes  in  their  circulating 
amount.     A  surplus,  instead  of  producing  a  proportional  de- 

VOL.  iv.  6 


82  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

prcciation  at  home,  might  bear  the  expense  of  transportation, 
and  avail  itself  of  its  current  value  abroad. 

If  I  have  misconstrued  the  meaning  of  the  report,  you  will  be 
good  enough  to  pardon  Ihe  error,  and  to  accept,  with  a  repe- 
tition of  my  thanks,  assurances  of  my  great  and  cordial  respect. 


TO    PRESIDENT   MONROE. 

Montpellier,  May  18,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  just  received  yours  of  the  13th.  We  had 
been  led  to  hope  that  your  health  was  better  re-established 
than  you  represent  it.  As  it  is  progressive,  and  your  constitu- 
tion, though,  like  mine,  the  worse  for  wear,  has  remains  of  good 
stamina,  I  will  not  despair  of  the  pleasure  of  seeing  you  in  July, 
and  of  making  our  visit  together  to  the  University.  Should 
prudence  forbid  such  a  journe}r,  I  think  you  ought  not  to  resign 
the  trust.  It  is  probable  there  will  be  a  quorum  without  you, 
and  I  would  prefer  the  risk  of  a  failure  to  a  loss  of  your  name 
and  your  future  aid.  I  should  myself  resign,  but  for  consider- 
ations belonging  to  you  as  well  as  myself.  I  do  not  think  your 
weakness,  unless  positively  disabling  you  for  the  journey,  should 
deter  you  from  it.  The  moderate  exercise  in  a  carriage  and  a 
change  of  air,  with  a  cheerful  meeting  with  your  friends,  may 
stimulate  your  convalescence.  You  have  heretofore  found  the 
experiment  beneficial. 

I  feel  the  value  of  the  interest  you  take  in  my  health.  It  was 
in  an  improved  state  when  I  reached  home,  notwithstanding  the 
fatiguing  session  of  the  Convention  and  the  exposure  on  the 
route.  But  I  found  the  neighborhood  under  a  visitation  of  the 
influenza,  and  I  had  a  relapse  from  which  I  suffered  considerably. 
I  have  for  some  time,  however,  been  regaining  what  I  lost,  and 
look  forward  to  the  discharge,  in  July,  of  my  duty  as  a  Visitor, 
and,  let  me  repeat,  not  without  the  hope  of  your  being  able  to  do 
the  same. 

You  will  recollect  that  the  Law  Chair  is  to  be  filled,  and  I 


1830.  LETTERS.  83 

am  very  sorry  to  say  that  no  candidates  have  been  yet  brought 
into  view.  I  have  not  received  a  line  from  any  of  our  col 
leagues  in  Orange  as  to  my  circular  on  the  subject. 

The  Constitution  seems  sure  of  a  very  considerable  majority, 
but  has  encountered  a  very  angry  and  active  opposition  in  the 
trans-AUeghany  district.  Unless  the  census  should  prove  that 
the  share  of  representation  allotted  to  it  is  a  fair  one,  there  will 
be  a  strenuous  effort  for  another  Convention. 

Mr.  Sparks,  who  is  editing  the  Diplomatic  Correspondence 
during  the  Confederation,  and  is  charged  with  the  Washington 
papers,  was  lately  with  me,  and  is,  I  find,  possessed  of  a  great 
and  valuable  mass  of  official  information  relating  to  the  Cabinet 
policy  of  G.  Britain  and  France  during  our  Revolutionary  pe- 
riod, having  been  allowed  access  to  the  secret  archives  of  both, 
and  even  to  take  copies  from  them.  He  says  he  has  ascertained 
from  British  as  well  as  French  evidence,  that  Mr.  Jay  was  en- 
tirely misled  in  the  views  he  had  taken  of  the  course  pursued 
by  the  French  Government  in  the  negotiations  for  peace.  On 
my  alluding  to  the  coincidence  of  Rayneval's  statements  to  you, 
with  the  lights  he  had  procured,  he  appeared  particularly  anx- 
ious to  see  the  statement,  and  as  I  presumed  it  would  be  useful 
to  truth  and  justice  in  a  historical  work  he  meditates,  I  ven- 
tured even  to  let  him  take  a  copy  from  mine,  but  with  an  under- 
standing that  he  was  to  make  no  public  use  of  it  without  your 
consent.  If  I  have  taken  too  great  a  liberty  the  copy  will  be 
returned.  He  says,  that  the  more  he  traced  the  conduct  of 
Franklin  the  more  he  found  it  worthy  of  his  high  character  for 
wisdom  and  patriotism. 

We  offer  our  joint  regards  to  Mrs.  M.  and  yourself,  with  our 
hopes  that  you  will  have  received  favorable  accounts  from  all 
the  absentees  of  the  family. 


TO   THOMAS   RITCHIE. 


J.  Madison,  with  his  respects  to  Mr.  Ritchie,  remarks  that  a 
marginal  note  in  the  Enquirer  of  the  18th  infers,  from  the  pages 


84  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

of  Helvidius,  that  J.  Madison  solemnly  protested  against  the 
"  Proclamation  of  Neutrality,"  as  it  has  been  called.  The  Pro- 
test was  not  against  the  Proclamation,  but  against  the  Execu- 
tive Prerogative  attempted  to  be  engrafted  on  it  in  the  publi- 
cation of  Pacificus,  to  which  that  of  Helvidius  was  an  answer. 
The  latter  justified  the  proclamation  in  its  true  construction. 
There  was  nothing,  therefore,  in  the  Protest  adverse  to  the  act 
of  General  Washington  or  the  participation  of  Mr.  Jefferson  in 
it.  If  Mr.  Ritchie,  on  recurring  to  Helvidius,  particularly  the 
introductory  and  last  letter,  should  be  satisfied  that  an  error 
has  been  committed,  he  will  of  course  correct  it;  which  may  be 
clone  without  reference  to  the  suggestion  of  J.  Madison,  svho 
does  not  wish  to  obtrude,  unnecessarily,  public  explanations, 
leaving  room  for  erroneous  inferences  from  silence  in  other 
cases. 

Montpelier,  May  24,  1830. 


TO   DANIEL   WEBSTER. 

Montpelliee,  May  27,  1S30. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  by  the  mail  of  yesterday  your  favor 
of  the  24th,  accompanied  by  a  copy  of  your  late  speech,  for  which 
I  return  my  thanks.  I  had  before  received  more  than  one  copy 
from  other  sources,  and  had  read  the  speech  with  a  full  sense  of 
its  powerful  bearing  on  the  subjects  discussed,  and  particularly 
its  overwhelming  effect  on  the  nullifying  doctrine  of  South  Caro- 
lina. Although  I  have  not  concealed  my  opinions  of  that  doc- 
trine, and  of  the  use  made  of  the  proceedings  of  Virginia*  in 
1798-99,  I  have  been  unwilling  to  make  a  public  exhibition  of 
them,  as  well  from  the  consideration  that  it  might  appear  ob- 
trusive, as  that  it  might  enlist  me  as  a  newspaper  polemic,  and 

•Neither  the  term  nullifying  nor  nullification  is  in  the  Resolutions  of  Virginia; 
nor  is  either  of  them  in  the  Resolutions  of  Kentucky  in  1798.  drawn  by  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson. The  Resolutions  of  that  State  in  1799.  in  which  the  word  nullification 
appears,  were  not  drawn  by  him,  as  is  shewn  by  the  last  paragraph  of  his  I  jtter 
to  W.  C.  Nicholas.    See  vol.  3  of  his  Correspondence,  p.  429. 


1P30.  LETTERS.  85 

lay  rae  under  au  obligation  to  correct  errors  in  other  cases  in 
which  I  was  concerned,  or  by  my  silence  admit  that  they  were 
not  errors.  I  had,  however,  been  led  by  a  letter  from  a  distin- 
guished champion  of  the  new  doctrine,  to  explain  my  views  of 
the  subject  somewhat  at  large,  and  in  an  answer  afterwards  to 
a  letter  from  Mr.  Everett,  to  enclose  a  copy  of  them.  For  a 
particular  reason  assigned  to  Mr.  E.,  I  asked  the  favor  of  him 
not  to  regard  it  as  for  public  use.  Taking  for  granted  that  you 
are  in  friendship  with  him,  I  beg  leave  to  refer  you  to  that  com- 
munication, as  an  economy  for  my  pen.  The  reference  will  re- 
move the  scruple  he  might  otherwise  feel  in  submitting  it  to 
your  perusal. 

The  actual  system  of  Government  for  the  United  States  is  so 
unexampled  in  its  origin,  so  complex  in  its  structure,  and  so  pe- 
culiar in  some  of  its  features,  that  in  describing  it  the  political 
vocabulary  does  not  furnish  terms  sufficiently  distinctive  and 
appropriate,  without  a  detailed  resort  to  the  facts  of  the  case. 
With  that  aid  I  have  endeavored  to  sketch  the  system  which  I 
understand  to  constitute  the  people  of  the  several  States  one 
people  for  certain  purposes,  with  a  Government  competent  to 
the  effectuation  of  them. 

Mrs.  M.  joins  me  in  the  acknowledgment  and  sincere  return 
of  your  friendly  recollections,  with  the  addition  of  the  respects 
and  good  wishes  which  we  pray  may  be  tendered  to  Mrs. 
Webster. 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    OABELL. 

Mat  31,  1830. 
Dear  Sir, — I  received  yesterday  yours  of  the  26th.  Having 
never  concealed  my  opinion  of  the  nullifying  doctrine  of  South 
Carolina,  I  did  not  regard  the  allusion  to  it  in  the  Whig,  es- 
pecially as  the  manner  of  the  allusion  showed  that  I  did  not 
obtrude  it.  I  should  have  regretted  a  publication  of  my  letters, 
because  they  did  not  combine  with  the  opinion  the  views  of  the 


86  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

subject  which  support  it.  I  have  latterly  been  drawn  into  a 
correspondence  with  an  advocate  of  the  doctrine,  which  led  me 
to  a  review  of  it  in  some  extent,  and  particularly  to  a  vindica- 
tion of  the  proceedings  of  Virginia  in  1798-99,  against  the  mis- 
use made  of  them.  You  will  see  in  vol.  iii,  page  429,  of  Mr. 
Jefferson's  Correspondence,  a  letter  to  W.  C.  Nicholas,  proving 
that  he  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  Kentucky  resolutions  of  17'.)'.), 
in  which  the  word  "nullification"  is  found.  The  resolutions 
of  that  State  in  1798,  which  were  drawn  by  him,  and  have  been 
republished  with  the  proceedings  of  Virginia,  do  not  contain 
that  or  any  equivalent  word.* 

That  you  may  see  the  views  I  have  taken  of  the  aberrations 
of  South  Carolina,  I  enclose  an  extract  from  the  correspondence 
above  referred  to.  Should  you  undertake  an  investigation  of 
the  subject,  it  may  point  your  attention  to  particular  sources 
of  information  that  might  escape  you.  But  I  must  apprize  you 
that  an  insuperable  bar  to  any  public  use  of  the  extract  is  op- 
posed by  the  peculiar  footing  on  which  the  correspondence  in 
question  rests. 

I  observe  that  the  President,  in  his  late  veto,  has  seen  in  mine 
of  1817,  against  internal  improvements  by  Congress,  a  concur- 
rence in  the  power  to  appropriate  money  for  the  purpose.  Not 
finding  the  message  which  he  cites,  I  can  only  say  that  my  mean- 
ing must  have  been  unfortunately  expressed  or  is  very  strangely 
misinterpreted.  The  veto  on  my  part  certainly  contemplated 
the  appropriation  of  money  as  well  as  the  operative  and  juris- 
dictional branches  of  the  power.  And,  as  far  as  I  have  refer- 
ences to  the  message,  it  has  never  been  otherwise  understood. 

Your  letter  contains  the  only  name  yet  brought  into  view  for 
the  chair  vacated  by  Mr.  Lomax.  All  our  colleagues  have  been 
silent  on  that  point.  I  hope  there  will  be  a  full  meeting  of  the 
Board  in  July,  though  I  fear  Mr.  Monroe's  feeble  health  will 
detain  him  from  it.  Until  I  have  the  pleasure  of  seeing  )ou, 
accept  my  cordial  salutations. 

*  See  Post,  109,  110. 


1830.  LETTERS.  87 


TO  N.  P.   TRIST. 

Montpellier,  June  3d,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  favor  of  May  29  was  duly  received.  The 
construction  put,  in  the  President's  Message,  on  the  veto  in  1817 
against  the  power  of  Congress  as  to  internal  improvements, 
could  not  fail  to  surprise  me.  To  my  consciousness  that  the 
veto  was  meant  to  deny  as  well  the  appropriating  as  the  execu- 
ting and  jurisdictional  branches  of  the  power,  was  added  the 
fact  that,  as  far  as  has  ever  fallen  under  my  notice,  the  references 
to  the  veto  have,  without  a  single  previous  exception,  so  under- 
stood it.  It  happens,  odd  as  it  may  seem,  that  I  cannot  find 
among  my  papers,  printed  or  manuscript,  a  copy  of  the  Message. 
The  edition  of  State  Papers  by  Waite,  which  I  have,  is  not 
brought  down  to  that  date.  I  cannot,  therefore,  ascertain  from 
the  entire  text  whether  the  fault  in  any  degree  lies  there.  I 
feel  much  confidence  that  the  misconstruction  is  the  effect  of  a 
too  slight  and  hasty  examination  of  the  document.  I  am  sorry 
on  every  account  for  the  error,  and  am  aware  of  what  I  owe  to 
the  kind  sensibility  which  prompted  your  wish  to  correct  it. 
As  this  will  probably  be  done  from  some  quarter  or  other 
through  the  gazettes,  and  justice,  as  far  as  I  am  concerned,  will 
be  involved  in  the  correction,  I  hope  you  will  consult  in  this, 
and  in  all  cases,  rather  the  delicacy  of  your  position  than  the 
friendly  impulses  which  ought  to  be  under  its  control. 

Since  my  letter  to  you  on  the  nullifying  doctrine,  I  have  been 
led  into  correspondences  in  which  some  additional  views  of  the 
subject  were  introduced.  The  two  facts  I  am  induced  to  men- 
tion are:  1.  That  the  printed  address  of  the  Virginia  Assembly 
in  '98  to  the  people,  gives  no  countenance  to  the  doctrine  any 
more  than  the  printed  debates  on  the  resolutions.  2.  That  the 
term  "nullification"  in  the  Kentucky  resolutions  belongs  to 
those  of  '99,  with  which  Mr.  Jefferson  had  nothing  to  do,  as  is 
proved  by  his  letter  to  Mr.  W.  C.  Nicholas,  in  vol.  3,  p.  429,  of 
his  Correspondence.  The  resolutions  of  '98  drawn  by  him  con- 
tain neither  that  nor  any  equivalent  term.* 

*  See  Post,  109,  110. 


88  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 


TO    M.    VAN   BUREN. 

Montpelliee,  June  3,  1830. 

J.  Madison  has  duly  received  the  copy  of  the  President's  Mes- 
sage forwarded  by  Mr.  Van  Buren.  In  returning  his  thanks 
for  this  polite  attention,  he  regrets  the  necessity  of  observing 
that  the  Message  has  not  rightly  conceived  the  intention  of  J. 
M.  in  his  veto  in  1817,  on  the  bill  relating  to  internal  improve- 
ments. It  was  an  object  of  the  veto  to  deny  to  Congress  as 
well  the  appropriating  power  as  the  executing  and  jurisdictional 
branches  of  it.  And  it  is  believed  that  this  was  the  general 
understanding  at  the  time,  and  has  continued  to  be  so,  according 
to  the  references  occasionally  made  to  the  document.  Whether 
the  language  employed  duly  conveyed  the  meaning  of  which  J. 
M.  retains  the  consciousness,  is  a  question  on  which  he  does  not 
presume  to  judge  for  others. 

Relying  on  the  candour  to  which  these  remarks  are  addressed, 
he  tenders  to  Mr.  Van  Buren  renewed  assurances  of  his  high 
esteem  and  good  wishes. 


TO    GENERAL   W.   H.    HARRISON. 

Montpellier,  June  5,  1830. 

DR  Sir. — I  received  in  due  time  the  copy  of  your  "  Remarks 
on  charges  made  against  you  during  your  diplomatic  residence 
in  Colombia,"  but  have  been  prevented  by  ill  health  and  other 
causes  from  an  earlier  acknowledgment  of  your  politeness.  I 
now  tender  you  my  thanks  for  the  communication.  The  remarks 
are  not  only  acceptable  to  your  friends  as  they  relate  to  your- 
self, but  valuable  as  illustrating  the  state  of  things  in  a  quarter 
where  everything  is  made  interesting  by  its  relation  to  the  cause 
of  self-government.  It  is  a  happy  reflection,  that  whilst  the  final 
success  of  the  experiment  there,  will  be  among  the  strongest 
supports  of  the  cause,  a  failure  can  be  fairly  explained  by  the 
unfortunate  peculiarity  of  circumstances  under  which  the  ex- 
periment is  made.    Whatever  may  have  been  the  different  views 


1830.  LETTERS.  89 

taken  of  the  letter  to  Bolivar,  none  can  contest  the  intellectual 
and  literary  merit  stamped  upon  it,  or  be  insensible  to  the  Re- 
publican feelings  which  prompted  it. 

With  a  repetition  of  my  thanks,  I  pray  you  to  accept  my  high 
esteem  and  cordial  respects. 


TO    M.    VAN   BUREN. 

Montpellier,  July  5,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  June  9  came  duly  to  hand.  On 
the  subject  of  the  discrepancy  between  the  construction  put  by 
the  Message  of  the  President  on  the  veto  of  1817  and  the  inten- 
tion of  its  author,  the  President  will  of  course  consult  his  own 
view  of  the  case.  For  myself,  I  am  aware  that  the  document 
must  speak  for  itself,  and  that  that  intention  cannot  be  substi- 
tuted for  the  established  rules  of  interpretation. 

The  several  points  on  which  you  desire  my  ideas  are  neces- 
sarily vague,  and  the  observations  on  them  cannot  well  be  other- 
wise. They  are  suggested  by  a  respect  for  your  request  rather 
than  by  a  hope  that  they  can  assist  the  object  of  it. 

"  Point  1.  The  establishment  of  some  rule  which  shall  give 
the  greatest  practicable  precision  to  the  power  of  appropriating 
money  to  objects  of  general  concern." 

The  rule  must  refer,  it  is  presumed,  either  to  the  objects  of 
appropriation  or  to  the  apportionment  of  the  money. 

A  specification  of  the  objects  of  general  concern,  in  terms  as 
definite  as  may  be,  seems  to  be  the  rule  most  applicable;  thus 
roads  simply,  if  for  all  the  uses  of  roads;  or  roads,  post  and  mil- 
itary, if  limited  to  those  uses;  or  post  roads  only,  if  so  limited; 
thus  canals,  either  generally  or  for  specified  uses;  so  again  edu- 
cation, as  limited  to  a  university,  or  extended  to  seminaries  of 
other  denominations. 

As  to  the  apportionment  of  the  money,  no  rule  can  exclude 
legislative  discretion  but  that  of  distribution  among  the  States 
according  to  their  presumed  contributions;  that  is,  to  their  ratio 
of  representation  in  Congress.   The  advantages  of  this  rule  are 


90  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

its  certainty  and  its  apparent  equity.  The  objections  to  it  may 
be,  that,  on  one  hand,  it  would  increase  the  comparative  agency 
of  the  Federal  Government,  aud,  on  the  other,  that  the  money 
might  not  be  expended  on  objects  of  general  concern;  the  inter- 
est of  [(articular  States  not  happening  to  coincide  with  the  gen- 
eral interest  in  relation  to  improvements  within  such  States. 

"  2.  A  rule  for  the  government  of  grants  for  light-houses,  and 
the  improvement  of  harbours  and  rivers,  which  will  avoid  the 
objects  which  it  is  desirable  to  exclude  from  the  present  action 
of  the  Government,  and,  at  the  same  time,  do  what  is  imperi- 
ously required  by  a  regard  to  the  general  commerce  of  the 
country." 

National  grants  in  these  cases  seem  to  admit  no  possible  rule 
of  discrimination,  but  as  the  objects  may  be  of  national  or  local 
character.  The  difficulty  lies  here,  as  in  all  cases  where  the 
degree  and  not  the  nature  of  the  case  is  to  govern  the  decision. 
In  the  extremes,  the  judgment  is  easily  formed;  as  between  re- 
moving obstructions  in  the  Mississippi,  the  highway  of  commerce 
for  half  the  nation,  and  a  like  operation  giving  but  little  exten- 
sion to  the  navigable  use  of  a  river,  itself  of  confined  use.  In 
the  intermediate  cases,  legislative  discretion,  and,  consequently, 
legislative  errors  and  partialities,  are  unavoidable.  Some  con- 
trol is  attainable  in  doubtful  cases  from  preliminary  investiga- 
tions and  reports  by  disinterested  and  responsible  agents. 

In  defraying  the  expense  of  internal  improvements,  strict  jus- 
tice would  require  that  a  part  only,  and  not  the  whole,  should 
be  borne  by  the  nation.  Take,  for  examples,  the  harbors  of 
New  York  and  New  Orleans.  However  important,  in  a  com- 
mercial view,  they  may  be  to  the  other  portions  of  the  Union, 
the  States  to  which  they  belong  must  derive  a  peculiar  as  well 
as  a  common  advantage  from  improvements  made  in  them,  and 
could  afford,  therefore,  to  combine  with  grants  from  the  com- 
mon treasury,  proportional  contributions  from  their  own.  On 
this  principle  it  is  that  the  practice  has  prevailed  in  the  States 
(as  it  has  done  with  Congress)  of  dividing  the  expense  of  cer- 
tain improvements  between  the  funds  of  the  State  and  ths  con- 
tributions of  those  locally  interested  in  them. 


1830.  LETTERS.  91 

Extravagant  and  disproportionate  expenditures  on  harbors, 
light-houses,  and  other  arrangements  on  the  seaboard,  ought  cer- 
tainly to  be  controlled  as  much  as  possible.  But  it  seems  not 
to  be  sufficiently  recollected,  that  in  relation  to  our  foreign  com- 
merce, the  burden  and  benefit  of  accommodating  and  protecting 
it  necessarily  go  together,  and  must  do  so  as  long  and  as  far  as 
the  public  revenue  continues  to  be  drawn  through  the  custom- 
house. Whatever  gives  facility  and  security  to  navigation, 
cheapens  imports;  and  all  who  consume  them,  wherever  residing, 
are  alike  interested  in  what  has  that  effect.  If  they  consume, 
they  ought,  as  they  now  do,  to  pay.  If  they  do  not  consume, 
they  do  not  pay.  The  consumer  in  the  most  inland  State  de- 
rives the  same  advantage  from  the  necessary  and  prudent  ex- 
penditures for  the  security  of  our  foreign  navigation  as  the 
consumer  in  a  maritime  State.  Other  local  expenditures  have 
not,  of  themselves,  a  correspondent  operation. 

"  3.  The  expediency  of  refusing  all  appropriations  for  inter- 
nal improvements  (other  than  those  of  the  character  last  referred 
to,  if  they  can  be  so  called)  until  the  national  debt  is  paid,  as 
well  on  account  of  the  sufficiency  of  that  motive,  as  to  give  time 
for  the  adoption  of  some  constitutional  or  other  arrangement 
by  which  the  whole  subject  may  be  placed  on  better  grounds; 
an  arrangement  which  will  never  be  seriously  attempted  as  long 
as  scattering  appropriations  are  made,  and  the  scramble  for 
them  thereby  encouraged." 

The  expediency  of  refusing  appropriations,  with  a  view  to  the 
previous  discharge  of  the  public  debt,  involves  considerations 
which  can  be  best  weighed  and  compared  at  the  focus  of  lights 
on  the  subject.  A  distant  view  like  mine  can  only  suggest  the 
remark,  too  vague  to  be  of  value,  that  a  material  delay  ought 
not  to  be  incurred  for  objects  not  both  important  and  urgent; 
nor  such  objects  to  be  neglected  in  order  to  avoid  an  immate- 
rial delay.  This  is,  indeed,  but  the  amount  of  the  exception 
glanced  at  in  your  parenthesis. 

The  mortifying  scenes  connected  with  a  surplus  revenue  are 
the  natural  offspring  of  a  surplus,  and  cannot,  perhaps,  be  en- 
tirely prevented  by  any  plan  of  appropriation  which  allows  a 


92  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

scop)  to  legislative  discretion.  The  evil  will  have  a  powerful 
control  in  the  pervading  dislike  to  taxes  even  the  most  indirect. 
The  taxes  lately  repealed  are  an  index  of  it.  Were  the  whole 
revenue  expended  on  internal  improvements  drawn  from  direct 
taxation,  there  would  be  danger  of  too  much  parsimony  rather 
than  too  much  profusion  at  the  treasury. 

"  4.  The  strong  objections  which  exist  against  subscriptions 
to  the  stock  of  private  companies  by  the  United  States." 

The  objections  are,  doubtless,  in  many  respects  strong.  Yet 
cases  might  present  themselves  which  might  not  be  favoured  by 
the  State,  while  the  concurring  agency  of  an  undertaking  com- 
pany would  be  desirable  in  a  national  view.  There  was  a  time, 
it  is  said,  when  the  State  of  Delaware,  influenced  by  the  profits 
of  a  portage  between  the  Delaware  and  Chesapeake,  was  un- 
friendly to  the  canal,  now  forming  so  important  a  link  of  inter- 
nal communication  between  the  North  and  the  South.  Under- 
takings by  private  companies  carry  with  them  a  presumptive 
evidence  of  utility,  and  the  private  stakes  in  them  some  security 
for  economy  in  the  execution,  the  want  of  which  is  the  bane  of 
public  undertakings.  Still  the  importunities  of  private  com- 
panies cannot  be  listened  to  with  more  caution  than  prudence 
requires. 

I  have,  as  you  know,  never  considered  the  powers  claimed 
for  Congress  over  roads  and  canals  as  within  the  grants  of  the 
Constitution.  But  such  improvements  being  justly  ranked 
among  the  greatest  advantages  and  best  evidences  of  good 
Government;  and  having,  moreover,  with  us  the  peculiar  rec- 
ommendation of  binding  the  several  parts  of  the  Union  more 
firmly  together,  I  have  always  thought  the  power  ought  to  be 
possessed  by  the  common  Government;  which  commands  the 
least  unpopular  and  most  productive  sources  of  revenue,  and 
can  alone  select  improvements  with  an  eye  to  the  national  good. 
The  States  are  restricted  in  their  pecuniary  resources;  and 
roads  and  canals  most  important  in  a  national  view  might  not 
be  important  to  the  State  or  States  possessing  the  domain  and 
the  soil,  or  might  even  be  deemed  disadvantageous;  and,  on  the 
most  favourable  supposition,  might  require  a  concert  of  means 


1830.  LETTERS.  93 

and  regulations  among  several  States  not  easily  effected,  nor 
unlikely  to  be  altogether  omitted. 

These  considerations  have  pleaded  with  me  in  favour  of  the 
policy  of  vesting  in  Congress  an  authority  over  internal  im- 
provements. I  am  sensible,  at  the  same  time,  of  the  magnitude 
of  the  trust,  as  well  as  of  the  difficulty  of  executing  it  properly, 
and  the  greater  difficulty  of  executing  it  satisfactorily. 

On  the  supposition  of  a  due  establishment  of  the  power  in' 
Congress,  one  of  the  modes  of  using  it  might  be  to  apportion 
a  reasonable  share  of  the  disposable  revenue  of  the  United 
States  among  the  States,  to  be  applied  by  them  to  cases  of  State 
concern;  with  a  reserved  discretion  in  Congress  to  effectuate 
improvements  of  general  concern,  which  the  States  might  not 
be  able  or  not  disposed  to  provide  for. 

If  Congress  do  not  mean  to  throw  away  the  rich  fund  inherent 
in  the  public  lands,  would  not  the  sales  of  them,  after  their  lib- 
eration from  the  original  pledge,  be  aptly  appropriated  to  ob- 
jects of  internal  improvement?  And  why  not,  also,  with  a 
supply  of  competent  authority,  to  the  removal  to  better  situa- 
tions of  the  free  black  as  well  as  red  population,  objects  con- 
fessedly of  national  importance  and  desirable  to  all  parties  ? 
But  I  am  travelling  out  of  the  subject  before  me. 

The  date  of  your  letter  reminds  me  of  the  delay  of  the  an- 
swer. The  delay  has  been  occasioned  by  interruptions  of  my 
health;  and  the  answer,  such  as  it  is,  is  offered  in  the  same  con- 
fidence in  which  it.  was  asked. 

With  great  esteem  and  cordial  salutations. 


TO   BARON  HYDE   DE  NEUVTLLE. 

Montpellier,  July  26th,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received,  through  Monsieur  Chersant,  for 
which  I  am  indebted  to  your  politeness,  the  two  pamphlets :  one, 
"  Discours  d'ouverture,  prononce  a  la  seance  ge'nCrale,"  &c,  &c; 
the  other,  "  De  la  question  Portugaise."     I  cannot  return  my 


94  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

thanks  for  them  without  remarking,  that  the  first  is  equally  dis- 
tinguished by  its  instructive  and  by  its  philanthropic  views;  and 
that  the  second  is  a  proof  that  the  young  claimant  of  the  throne 
of  Portugal  could  not  have  been  favored  with  a  better  informed 
or  more  eloquent  advocate. 

I  am  induced  by  the  interest  you  take  in  whatever  concerns 
our  country,  to  inclose  a  copy  of  the  new  Constitution  adopted 
by  Virginia.  It  lias  just  received  the  popular  sanction  by  votes 
of  about  25,000  against  15,000,  and  will  be  carried  into  execu- 
tion within  the  present  year.  As  must  happen  in  such  cases,  it 
is  the  offspring  of  mutual  concessions  of  opinions  and  interests, 
and  the  parent  of  some  dissatisfactions.  But  the  American  peo- 
ple are  too  well  schooled  in  the  duty  and  practice  of  submitting 
to  the  will  of  the  majority  to  permit  any  serious  uneasiness  on 
that  account. 

Mrs.  Madison  writes  a  few  lines  to  the  Baroness.  In  the  cor- 
dial regards  they  express  I  beg  leave  to  join,  as  she  does,  in 
the  sentiments  of  esteem  and  good  wishes  of  which  I  pray  you 
to  accept  the  sincere  assurance. 


TO   EDWARD    EVERETT. 

J.  Madison,  with  his  best  respects  to  Mr.  Everett,  thanks  him 
for  the  copy  of  his  "  Address  on  the  Centennial  Anniversary  of 
the  arrival  of  Governor  Winthrop  at  Charlestown." 

The  theme,  interesting  as  it  is  in  itself,  derives  new  attrac- 
tion from  the  touching  details  and  appropriate  reflections  woven 
into  the  address. 

J.  M.  takes  this  occasion  of  thanking  Mr.  Everett  for  the 
copy,  also,  of  his  very  able  speech  on  the  Indian  subject  in  the 
House  of  Representatives. 

Montpellier,  Aug.  5,  1830. 


1830.  LETTERS.  95 

TO    EDWARD    EVERETT. 

MONTPELLIER,   A.UgUSt,    1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  your  letter,  in  which  you 
refer  to  the  "  nullifying  doctrine,"  advocated  as  a  constitutional 
right  by  some  of  our  distinguished  fellow-citizens;  and  to  the 
proceedings  of  the  Virginia  Legislature  in  1798  and  1799,  as 
appealed  to  in  behalf  of  that  doctrine;  and  you  express  a  wish 
for  ray  ideas  on  those  subjects. 

I  am  aware  of  the  delicacy  of  the  task  in  some  respects,  and 
the  difficulty  in  every  respect  of  doing  full  justice  to  it.  But 
having,  in  more  than  one  instance,  complied  with  a  like  request 
from  other  friendly  quarters,  I  do  not  decline  a  sketch  of  the 
views  which  I  have  been  led  to  take  of  the  doctrine  in  question, 
as  well  as  some  others  connected  with  them,  and  of  the  grounds 
from  which  it  appears  that  the  proceedings  of  Virginia  have 
been  misconceived  by  those  who  have  appealed  to  them.  In 
order  to  understand  the  true  character  of  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  the  error,  not  uncommon,  must  be  avoided, 
of  viewing  it  through  the  medium  either  of  a  consolidated  Gov- 
ernment or  of  a  confederated  Government,  while  it  is  neither 
the  one  nor  the  other,  but  a  mixture  of  both.  And  having  in 
no  model  the  similitudes  and  analogies  applicable  to  other  sys- 
tems of  government,  it  must,  more  than  any  other,  be  its  own 
interpreter,  according  to  its  text  and  the  facts  of  the  case. 

From  these  it  will  be  seen  that  the  characteristic  peculiarities 
of  the  Constitution  are:  1.  The  mode  of  its  formation  ;  2.  The 
division  of  the  supreme  powers  of  Government  between  the 
States  in  their  united  capacity  and  the  States  in  their  individ- 
ual capacities. 

1.  It  was  formed,  not  by  the  governments  of  the  component 
States,  as  the  Federal  Government  for  which  it  was  substituted 
was  formed;  nor  was  it  formed  by  a  majority  of  the  people  of 
the  United  States,  as  a  single  community,  in  the  manner  of  a 
consolidated  Government. 

It  was  formed  by  the  States — that  is,  by  the  people  in  each  of 
the   States,  acting  in   their  highest  sovereign  capacity;   and 


90  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

formed,  consequently,  by  the  same  authority  which  formed  the 
State  Constitutions. 

Being  thus  derived  from  the  same  source  as  the  Constitutions 
of  the  States,  it  lias  within  each  State  the  same  authority  as  the 
Constitution  of  the  State;  and  is  as  much  a  Constitution,  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  term,  within  its  prescribed  sphere,  as  the 
Constitutions  of  the  States  are  within  their  respective  spheres; 
but  with  this  obvious  and  essential  difference,  that,  being  a  com- 
pact among  the  States  in  their  highest  sovereign  capacity,  and 
constituting  the  people  thereof  one  people  for  certain  purposes, 
it  cannot  be  altered  or  annulled  at  the  will  of  the  States  indi- 
vidually, as  the  Constitution  of  a  State  may  be  at  its  individual 
will. 

2.  And  that  it  divides  the  supreme  powers  of  Government 
between  the  Government  of  the  United  States  and  the  govern- 
ments of  the  individual  States,  is  stamped  on  the  face  of  the  in- 
strument; the  powers  of  war  and  of  taxation,  of  commerce  and 
of  treaties,  and  other  enumerated  powers  vested  in  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  being  of  as  high  and  sovereign  a 
character  as  any  of  the  powers  reserved  to  the  State  govern- 
ments. 

Nor  is  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  created  by  the 
Constitution,  less  a  Government,  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term, 
within  the  sphere  of  its  powers,  than  the  governments  created 
by  the  constitutions  of  the  States  are  within  their  several 
spheres.  It  is,  like  them,  organized  into  Legislative,  Execu- 
tive, and  Judiciary  departments.  It  operates,  like  them,  di- 
rectly on  persons  and  things.  And,  like  them,  it  has  at  com- 
mand a  physical  force  for  executing  the  powers  committed  to 
it.  The  concurrent  operation,  in  certain  cases,  is  one  of  the 
features  marking  the  peculiarity  of  the  system. 

Between  these  different  constitutional  governments — the  one 
operating  in  all  the  States;  the  others  operating  separately  in 
each,  with  the  aggregate  powers  of  government  divided  between 
them — it  could  not  escape  attention  that  controversies  would 
arise  concerning  the  boundaries  of  jurisdiction,  and  that  some 
provision  ought  to  be  made  for  such  occurrences.     A  political 


1830.  LETTERS.  97 

system  that  does  not  provide  for  a  peaceable  and  authoritative 
termination  of  occurring  controversies,  would  not  be  more  than 
the  shadow  of  a  Government;  the  object  and  end  of  a  real  Gov- 
ernment being  the  substitution  of  law  and  order  for  uncertainty, 
confusion,  and  violence. 

That  to  have  left  a  final  decision  in  such  cases  to  each  of  the 
States,  then  thirteen  and  already  twenty-four,  could  not  fail  to 
make  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States  different 
in  different  States,  was  obvious;  and  not  less  obvious  that  this 
diversity  of  independent  decisions  must  altogether  distract  the 
Government  of  the  Union,  and  speedily  put  an  end  to  the  Union 
itself.  A  uniform  authority  of  the  laws  is  in  itself  a  vital  prin- 
ciple. Some  of  the  most  important  laws  could  not  be  partially 
executed.  They  must  be  executed  in  all  the  States,  or  they  could 
be  duly  executed  in  none.  An  impost  or  an  excise,  for  example, 
if  not  in  force  in  some  States,  would  be  defeated  in  others.  It 
is  well  known  that  this  was  among  the  lessons  of  experience 
which  had  a  primary  influence  in  bringing  about  the  existing 
Constitution.  A  loss  of  its  general  authority  would,  moreover, 
revive  the  exasperating  questions  between  the  States  holding 
ports  for  foreign  commerce  and  the  adjoining  States  without 
them,  to  which  are  now  added  all  the  inland  States  necessarily 
carrying  on  their  foreign  commerce  through  other  States. 

To  have  made  the  decisions  under  the  authority  of  the  indi- 
vidual States  co-ordinate  in  all  cases  with  decisions  under  the 
authority  of  the  United  States,  would  unavoidably  produce  col- 
lisions incompatible  with  the  peace  of  society,  and  with  that 
regular  and  efficient  administration  which  is  the  essence  of  free 
Governments.  Scenes  could  not  be  avoided  in  which  a  minis- 
terial officer  of  the  United  States,  and  the  correspondent  officer 
of  an  individual  State,  would  have  rencounters  in  executing  con- 
flicting decrees,  the  result  of  which  would  depend  on  the  com- 
parative force  of  the  local  posse  attending  them,  and  that  a  cas- 
ualty depending  on  the  political  opinions  and  party  feelings  in 
different  States. 

To  have  referred  every  clashing  decision  under  the  two  au- 
thorities for  a  final  decision  to  the  States  as  parties  to  the  Con- 

VOL.  iv.  7 


93  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

stitution,  would  be  attended  with  delays,  with  inconveniences, 
and  with  expenses  amounting  to  a  prohibition  of  the  expedient, 
not  to  mention  its  tendency  to  impair  the  salutary  veneration 
for  a  system  requiring  such  frequent  interpositions,  nor  the  del- 
icate questions  which  might  present  themselves  as  to  the  form 
of  stating  the  appeal,  and  as  to  the  quorum  for  deciding  it. 

To  have  trusted  to  negotiation  for  adjusting  disputes  between 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  and  the  State  govern- 
ments, as  between  independent  and  separate  sovereignties, 
would  have  lost  sight  altogether  of  a  Constitution  and  Govern- 
ment for  the  Union,  and  opened  a  direct  road,  from  a  failure  of 
that  resort,  to  the  ultima  ratio  between  nations  wholly  inde- 
pendent of,  and  alien  to,  each  other.  If  the  idea  had  its  origin 
in  the  process  of  adjustment  between  separate  branches  of  the 
same  Government,  the  analogy  entirely  fails.  In  the  case  of 
disputes  between  independent  parts  of  the  same  Government, 
neither  part  being  able  to  consummate  its  will,  nor  the  Govern- 
ment to  proceed  without  a  concurrence  of  the  parts,  necessity 
brings  about  an  accommodation.  In  disputes  between  a  State 
government  and  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  the  case 
is,  practically  as  well  as  theoretically,  different;  each  party  pos- 
sessing all  the  departments  of  an  organized  Government,  Legis- 
lative, Executive,  and  Judiciary,  and  having  each  a  physical 
force  to  support  its  pretensions.  Although  the  issue  of  nego- 
tiation might  sometimes  avoid  this  extremity,  how  often  would 
it  happen  among  so  many  States  that  an  unaccommodating  spirit 
in  some  would  render  that  resource  unavailing?  A  contrary 
supposition  would  not  accord  with  a  knowledge  of  human  na- 
ture or  the  evidence  of  our  own  political  history. 

The  Constitution,  not  relying  on  any  of  the  preceding  mod- 
ifications for  its  safe  and  successful  operation,  has  expressly 
declared,  on  the  one  hand,  1.  "  That  the  Constitution,  and  the 
laws  made  in  pursuance  thereof,  and  all  treaties  made  under  the 
authority  of  the  United  States,  shall  be  the  supreme  law  of  the 
land.  2.  That  the  judges  of  every  State  shall  be  bound  thereby, 
anything  in  the  constitution  and  laws  of  any  State  to  the  con- 
trary notwithstanding.     3.  That  the  judicial  power  of  the  Uni- 


1830.  LETTERS.  99 

ted  States  shall  extend  to  all  cases  in  law  and  equity  arising 
under  the  Constitution,  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  and  trea- 
ties made  under  their  authority,"  &c. 

On  the  other  hand,  as  a  security  of  the  rights  and  powers  of 
the  States  in  their  individual  capacities,  against  an  undue  pre- 
ponderance of  the  powers  granted  to  the  Government  over  them 
in  their  united  capacity,  the  Constitution  has  relied  on,  1.  The 
responsibility  of  the  Senators  and  Representatives  in  the  Legis- 
lature of  the  United  States  to  the  Legislatures  and  people  of 
the  States.  2.  The  responsibility  of  the  President  to  the  people 
of  the  United  States ;  and,  3.  The  liability  of  the  Executive  and 
Judicial  functionaries  of  the  United  States  to  impeachment  by 
the  Representatives  of  the  people  of  the  States  in  one  branch  of 
the  Legislature  of  the  United  States,  and  trial  by  the  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  States  in  the  other  branch;  the  State  function- 
aries, legislative,  executive,  and  judiciary,  being,  at  the  same 
time,  in  their  appointment  and  responsibility,  altogether  inde- 
pendent of  the  agency  or  authority  of  the  United  States. 

How  far  this  structure  of  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  be  adequate  and  safe  for  its  objects,  time  alone  can  abso- 
lutely determine.  Experience  seems  to  have  shown,  that  what- 
ever may  grow  out  of  future  stages  of  our  national  career,  there 
is  as  yet  a  sufficient  control  in  the  popular  will  over  the  Execu- 
tive and  Legislative  departments  of  the  Government.  When 
the  alien  and  sedition  laws  were  passed  in  contravention  to  the 
opinions  and  feelings  of  the  community,  the  first  elections  that 
ensued  put  an  end  to  them.  And  whatever  may  have  been  the 
character  of  other  acts  in  the  judgment  of  many  of  us,  it  is  but 
true  that  they  have  generally  accorded  with  the  views  of  a  ma- 
jority of  the  States  and  of  the  people.  At  the  present  day  it 
seems  well  understood,  that  the  laws  which  have  created  most 
dissatisfaction  have  had  a  like  sanction  without  doors;  and 
that,  whether  continued,  varied,  or  repealed,  a  like  proof  will 
be  given  of  the  sympathy  and  responsibility  of  the  representa- 
tive body  to  the  constituent  body.  Indeed,  the  great  complaint 
now  is,  not  against  the  want  of  this  sympathy  and  responsibility, 


100  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

but  against  the  results  of  them  in  the  legislative  policy  of  the 
nation. 

With  respect  to  the  judicial  power  of  the  United  States,  and 
the  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court,  in  relation  to  the  boundary 
of  jurisdiction  between  the  Federal  and  the  State  governments, 
I  may  be  permitted  to  refer  to  the  thirty-ninth  number  of  the 
"Federalist"*  for  the  light  in  which  the  subject  was  regarded 
by  its  writer  at  the  period  when  the  Constitution  was  depend- 
ing, and  it  is  believed  that  the  same  was  the  prevailing  view 
then  taken  of  it;  that  the  same  view  has  continued  to  prevail; 
and  that  it  does  so  at  this  time,  notwithstanding  the  eminent 
exceptions  to  it. 

But  it  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  concession  of  this  power 
to  the  Supreme  Court,  in  cases  falling  within  the  course  of  its 
functions,  to  maintain  that  the  power  has  not  always  been 
rightly  exercised.  To  say  nothing  of  the  period,  happily  a 
short  one,  when  judges  in  their  seats  did  not  abstain  from  in- 
temperate and  party  harangues,  equally  at  variance  with  their 
duty  and  their  dignity,  there  have  been  occasional  decisions 
from  the  bench  which  have  incurred  serious  and  extensive  dis- 
approbation. Still  it  would  seem  that,  with  but  few  exceptions, 
the  course  of  the  judiciary  has  been  hitherto  sustained  by  the 
predominant  sense  of  the  nation. 

Those  who  have  denied  or  doubted  the  supremacy  of  the  judi- 
cial power  of  the  United  States,  and  denounce  at  the  same  time 
nullifying  power  in  a  State,  seem  not  to  have  sufficiently  adverted 
to  the  utter  inefficiency  of  a  supremacy  in  a  law  of  the  land, 

*  No.  39.  It  is  true  that,  in  controversies  relating  to  the  boundary  between  the 
two  jurisdictions,  the  tribunal  which  is  ultimately  to  decide  is  to  be  established 
under  the  General  Government.  But  this  does  not  change  the  principle  of  the 
case.  The  decision  is  to  be  impartially  made,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  Con- 
stitution; and  all  the  usual  and  most  effectual  precautions  are  taken  to  secure 
this  impartiality.  Some  such  tribunal  is  clearly  essential  to  prevent  an  appeal 
to  the  sword  and  a  dissolution  of  the  compact;  and  that  it  ought  to  be  estab- 
lished under  the  general,  rather  than  under  the  loc»l  governments,  or,  to  speak 
more  properly,  that  it  could  be  safely  established  under  the  first  alone,  i*  a  posi- 
tion not  likely  to  be  combated. 


1830.  LETTERS.  101 

without  a  supremacy  in  the  exposition  and  execution  of  the 
law;  nor  to  the  destruction  of  all  equipoise  between  the  Fed- 
eral Government  and  the  State  governments,  if,  while  the  func- 
tionaries of  the  Federal  Government  are  directly  or  indirectly 
elected  by  and  responsible  to  the  States,  and  the  functionaries 
of  the  States  are  in  their  appointments  and  responsibility  wholly 
independent  of  the  United  States,  no  constitutional  control  of 
any  sort  belonged  to  the  United  States  over  the  States.  Under 
such  an  organization,  it  is  evident  that  it  would  be  in  the  power 
of  the  States  individually  to  pass  unauthorized  laws,  and  to 
carry  them  into  complete  effect,  anything  in  the  Constitution 
and  laws  of  the  United  States  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. 
This  would  be  a  nullifying  power  in  its  plenary  character;  and 
whether  it  had  its  final  effect  through  the  Legislative,  Execu- 
tive, or  Judiciary  organ  of  the  State,  would  be  equally  fatal  to 
the  constituted  relation  between  the  two  Governments. 

Should  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  as  here  reviewed, 
be  found  not  to  secure  the  Government  and  rights  of  the  States 
against  usurpations  and  abuses  on  the  part  of  the  United  States, 
the  final  resort  within  the  purview  of  the  Constitution  lies  in 
an  amendment  of  the  Constitution,  according  to  a  process  ap- 
plicable by  the  States. 

And  in  the  event  of  a  failure  of  every  constitutional  resort, 
and  an  accumulation  of  usurpations  and  abuses  rendering  pas- 
sive obedience  and  non-resistence  a  greater  evil  than  resistence 
and  revolution,  there  can  remain  but  one  resort,  the  last  of  all, 
an  appeal  from  the  cancelled  obligations  of  the  constitutional 
compact  to  original  rights  and  the  law  of  self-preservation. 
This  is  the  "ultima  ratio"  under  all  Governments,  whether  con- 
solidated, confederated,  or  a  compound  of  both;  and  it  cannot 
be  doubted  that  a  single  member  of  the  Union,  in  the  extremity 
supposed,  but  in  that  only,  would  have  a  right,  as  an  extra  and 
ultra  constitutional  right,  to  make  the  appeal. 

This  brings  us  to  the  expedient  lately  advanced,  which  claims 
for  a  single  State  a  right  to  appeal  against  an  exercise  of  power 
by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  decided  by  the  State 
to  be  unconstitutional,  to  the  parties  of  the  constitutional  com- 


102  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

pact;  the  decision  of  the  State  to  have  the  effect  of  nullifying 
the  act  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  unless  the  de- 
cision of  the  State  be  reversed  by  three-fourths  of  the  parties. 

The  distinguished  names  and  high  authorities  which  appear 
to  liave  asserted  and  given  a  practical  scope  to  this  doctrine, 
entitle  it  to  a  respect  which  it  might  be  difficult  otherwise  to 
feel  for  it. 

If  the  doctrine  were  to  be  understood  as  requiring  the  three- 
fourths  of  the  States  to  sustain,  instead  of  that  proportion  to 
reverse,  the  decision  of  the  appealing  State,  the  decision  to  be 
without  effect  during  the  appeal,  it  would  be  sufficient  to  re- 
mark, that  this  extra  constitutional  course  might  well  give  way 
to  that  marked  out  by  the  Constitution,  which  authorizes  two- 
thirds  of  the  States  to  institute,  and  three-fourths  to  effectuate, 
an  amendment  of  the  Constitution,  establishing  a  permanent 
rule  of  the  highest  authority,  in  place  of  an  irregular  precedent 
of  construction  only. 

But  it  is  understood  that  the  nullifying  doctrine  imports  that 
the  decision  of  the  State  is  to  be  presumed  valid,  and  that  it 
overrules  the  law  of  the  United  States  unless  overruled  by 
three-fourths  of  the  States. 

Can  more  be  necessary  to  demonstrate  the  inadmissibility  of 
such  a  doctrine,  than  that  it  puts  it  in  the  power  of  the  smallest 
fraction  over  one-fourth  of  the  United  States — that  is,  of  seven 
States  out  of  twenty -four — to  give  the  law  and  even  the  Consti- 
tution to  seventeen  States,  each  of  the  seventeen  having,  as 
parties  to  the  Constitution,  an  equal  right  with  each  of  the 
seven  to  expound  it  and  to  insist  on  the  exposition?  That  the 
seven  might,  in  particular  instances,  be  right,  and  the  seventeen 
wrong,  is  more  than  possible.  But  to  establish  a  position  and 
permanent  rule  giving  such  a  power  to  such  a  minority  over 
such  a  majority,  would  overturn  the  first  principle  of  free  Gov- 
ernment, and  in  practice  necessarily  overturn  the  Government 
itself. 

It  is  to  be  recollected  that  the  Constitution  was  proposed  to 
the  people  of  the  States  as  a  whole,  and  unanimously  adopted 
by  the  States  as  a  whole,  it  being  a  part  of  the  Constitution  that 


1830.  LETTERS.  103 

not  less  than  three-fourths  of  the  States  should  be  competent  to 
make  any  alteration  in  what  had  been  unanimously  agreed  to. 
So  great  is  the  caution  on  this  point,  that  in  two  cases  when 
peculiar  interests  were  at  stake,  a  proportion  even  of  three- 
fourths  is  distrusted,  and  unanimity  required  to  make  an  altera- 
tion. 

When  the  Constitution  was  adopted  as  a  whole,  it  is  certain 
that  there  were  many  parts  which,  if  separately  proposed,  would 
have  been  promptly  rejected.  It  is  far  from  impossible  that 
every  part  of  the  Constitution  might  be  rejected  by  a  majority, 
and  yet,  taken  together  as  a  whole,  be  unanimously  accepted. 
Free  constitutions  will  rarely,  if  ever,  be  formed  without  recip- 
rocal concessions;  without  articles  conditioned  on  and  balan- 
cing each  other.  Is  there  a  constitution  of  a  single  State  out 
of  the  twenty-four  that  would  bear  the  experiment  of  having 
its  component  parts  submitted  to  the  people  and  separately  de- 
cided on? 

What  the  fate  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  would 
be,  if  a  small  proportion  of  States  could  expunge  parts  of  it 
particularly  valued  by  a  large  majority,  can  have  but  one  an- 
swer. 

The  difficulty  is  not  removed  by  limiting  the  doctrine  to  cases 
of  construction.  How  many  cases  of  that  sort,  involving  cardi- 
nal provisions  of  the  Constitution,  have  occurred  ?  How  many 
now  exist?  How  many  may  hereafter  spring  up?  How  many 
might  be  ingeniously  created,  if  entitled  to  the  privilege  of  a 
decision  in  the  mode  proposed? 

Is  it  certain  that  the  principle  of  that  mode  would  not  reach 
farther  than  is  contemplated  ?  If  a  single  State  can  of  right 
require  three-fourths  of  its  co  States  to  overrule  its  exposition 
of  the  Constitution,  because  that  proportion  is  authorized  to 
amend  it,  would  the  plea  be  less  plausible  that,  as  the  Consti- 
tution was  unanimously  established,  it  ought  to  be  unanimously 
expounded  ? 

The  reply  to  all  such  suggestions  seems  to  be  unavoidable 
and  irresistible:  that  the  Constitution  is  a  compact;  that  its 
text  is  to  be  expounded  according  to  the  provision  for  expound- 


104  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

ing;  it,  making  a  part  of  the  compact;  and  that  none  of  the  par- 
ties can  rightfully  renounce  the  expounding  provision  more  than 
any  other  part.  When  such  a  right  accrues,  as  it  may  accrue,  it 
must  grow  out  of  abuses  of  the  compact  releasing  the  sufferers 
from  their  fealty  to  it. 

In  favour  of  the  nullifying  claim  for  the  States  individually, 
it  appears,  as  you  observe,  that  the  proceedings  of  the  Legisla- 
ture of  Virginia  in  1798  and  1799  against  the  alien  and  sedition 
acts  are  much  dwelt  upon. 

It  may  often  happen,  as  experience  proves,  that  erroneous 
constructions,  not  anticipated,  may  not  be  sufficiently  guarded 
against  in  the  language  used;  and  it  is  due  to  the  distinguished 
individuals  who  have  misconceived  the  intention  of  those  pro- 
ceedings to  suppose  that  the  meaning  of  the  Legislature,  though 
well  comprehended  at  the  time,  may  not  now  be  obvious  to  those 
unacquainted  with  the  contemporary  indications  and  impres- 
sions. 

But  it  is  believed  that  by  keeping  in  view  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  governments  of  the  States,  and  the  States  in  the  sense 
in  which  they  were  parties  to  the  Constitution;  between  the 
rights  of  the  parties,  in  their  concurrent  and  in  their  individual 
capacities;  between  the  several  modes  and  objects  of  interposi- 
tion against  the  abuses  of  power,  and  especially  between  inter- 
positions within  the  purview  of  the  Constitution,  and  interposi- 
tions appealing  from  the  Constitution  to  the  rights  of  nature, 
paramount  to  all  constitutions, — with  these  distinctions  kept  in 
view,  and  an  attention,  always  of  explanatory  use,  to  the  views 
and  arguments  which  were  combated,  a  confidence  is  felt  that 
the  resolutions  of  Virginia,  as  vindicated  in-  the  report  on  them, 
will  be  found  entitled  to  an  exposition,  showing  a  consistency 
in  their  parts  and  an  inconsistency  of  the  whole  with  the  doc- 
trine under  consideration. 

That  the  Legislature  could  not  have  intended  to  sanction 
such  a  doctrine,  is  to  be  inferred  from  the  debates  in  the  House 
of  Delegates,  and  from  the  address  of  the  two  Houses  to  their 
constituents  on  the  subject  of  the  resolutions.  The  tenor  of 
the  debates,  which  were  ably  conducted,  and  are  understood  to 


1830.  LETTERS.  105 

have  been  revised  for  the  press  by  most,  if  not  all,  of  the  speak- 
ers, discloses  no  reference  whatever  to  a  constitutional  right  in 
an  individual  State  to  arrest  by  force  the  operation  of  a  law  01 
the  United  States.  Concert  among  the  States  for  redress 
against  the  alien  and  sedition  laws,  as  acts  of  usurped  power, 
was  a  leading  sentiment;  and  the  attainment  of  a  concert  the 
immediate  object  of  the  course  adopted  by  the  Legislature; 
which  was  that  of  inviting  the  other  States  "  to  concur  in  de- 
claring the  acts  to  be  unconstitutional,  and  to  co-operate  by  the 
necessary  and  proper  measures  in  maintaining  unimpaired  the 
authorities,  rights,  and  liberties  reserved  to  the  States  respect- 
ively and  to  the  people."*  That  by  the  necessary  and  proper 
measures  to  be  concurrently  and  co-operatively  taken,  were 
meant  measures  known  to  the  Constitution,  particularly  the  or- 
dinary control  of  the  people  and  Legislatures  of  the  States  over 
the  Government  of  the  United  States,  cannot  be  doubted;  and 
the  interposition  of  this  control,  as  the  event  showed,  was  equal 
to  the  occasion. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark,  and  explanatory  of  the  intentions  of 
the  Legislature,  that  the  words  "  not  law,  but  utterly  null,  void, 
and  of  no  force  or  effect,"  which  had  followed,  in  one  of  the 
resolutions,  the  word  "  unconstitutional,"  were  struck  out  by 
common  consent.  Though  the  words  were,  in  fact,  but  synony- 
mous with  "unconstitutional,"  yet,  to  guard  against  a  misun- 
derstanding of  this  phrase  as  more  than  declaratory  of  opinion, 
the  word  "unconstitutional"  alone  was  retained,  as  not  liable 
to  that  danger. 

The  published  address  of  the  Legislature  to  the  people,  their 
constituents,  affords  another  conclusive  evidence  of  its  views. 
The  address  warns  them  against  the  encroaching  spirit  of  the 
General  Government;  argues  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  alien 
and  sedition  acts;  points  to  other  instances  in  which  the  consti- 
tutional limits  had  been  overleaped;  dwells  upon  the  dangerous 
mode  of  deriving  power  by  implications;  and,  in  general,  presses 
the  necessity  of  watching  over  the  consolidating  tendency  of 

*  See  the  concluding  resolution  of  1798. 


106  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

the  federal  policy.  But  nothing  is  said  that  can  be  understood 
to  look  to  means  of  maintaining  the  rights  of  the  States  beyond 
the  regular  ones  within  the  forms  of  the  Constitution. 

If  any  farther  lights  on  the  subject  could  be  needed,  a  very 
strong  one  is  reflected  in  the  answers  to  the  resolutions  by  the 
States  which  protested  against  them.  The  main  objection  to 
these,  beyond  a  few  general  complaints  of  the  inflammatory  ten- 
dency of  the  resolutions,  was  directed  against  the  assumed  au- 
thority of  a  State  Legislature  to  declare  a  law  of  the  United 
States  unconstitutional,  which  they  pronounced  an  unwarrantable 
interference  with  the  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States.  Had  the  resolutions  been  regarded  as 
avowing  and  maintaining  a  right  in  an  individual  State  to  arrest 
by  force  the  execution  of  a  law  of  the  United  States,  it  must  be 
presumed  that  it  would  have  been  a  conspicuous  object  of  their 
denunciation. 


TO   EDWARD   EVERETT. 

Montpellier,  Aug'  20,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  yours  of  the  11th  instant,  and 
wish  I  could  give  the  information  it  asks  with  the  desired  par- 
ticularity and  certainty. 

I  believe,  though  I  may  possibly  be  wrong,  that  no  answers 
to  the  Virginia  Resolutions  of  '98  were  given  by  the  States, 
other  than  those  enumerated  in  the  pamphlet  you  have.  I  have 
not  the  means  of  ascertaining  the  fact.  If  any  instructions  were 
given  by  the  Legislature  to  the  Senators  in  Congress  beyond 
the  transmission  of  the  Resolutions,  they  must  be  found  in  the 
Journals  of  the  proper  year,  which  I  do  not  possess.  I  have 
only  a  broken  set  which  does  not  contain  them.  A  complete 
set  has  latterly  been  collected  and  published,  but  no  copy,  as 
far  as  I  know,  is  at  present  within  my  reach. 

There  is  not,  I  am  persuaded,  the  slightest  ground  for  sup- 
posing that  Mr.  Jefferson  departed  from  his  purpose  not  to  fur- 
nish Kentucky  with  a  set  of  Resolutions  for  the  year  '99.     It  is 


1830.  LETTERS.  107 

certain  that  he  penned  the  Resolutions  of  '98,  and,  probably,  in 
the  terms  in  which  they  passed.  It  was  in  those  of  '99  that  the 
word  "  nullification  "  appears.* 

Finding  among  my  pamphlets  a  copy  of  the  debates  in  the 
Virginia  House  o'f  Delegates  on  the  Resolutions  of  '98,  and  one 
of  an  address  of  the  two  Houses  to  their  constituents  on  the  oc- 
casion, I  enclose  them  for  your  perusal;  and  I  add  another, 
though  it  is  less  likely  to  be  new  to  you,  the  "  Report  of  a  Com- 
mittee of  the  S.  Carolina  House  of  Representatives,  Decr  9, 
1828,"  in  which  the  nullifying  doctrine  is  stated  in  the  precise 
form  in  which  it  is  now  asserted.  There  was  a  protest  by  the 
minority  in  the  Virginia  Legislature  of  '98  against  the  Resolu- 
tions, but  I  have  no  copy.  The  matter  of  it  may  be  inferred 
from  the  speeches  in  the  Debates.  I  was  not  a  member  in  that 
year,  though  the  penman  of  the  Resolutions,  as  now  supposed. 

Previous  to  the  receipt  of  your  letter  above  acknowledged, 
that  of  the  7th  had  come  safe  to  hand.  The  use  you  wish  to 
make  of  the  copy  of  the  letter  to  which  it  refers,  has  become 
particularly  liable  to  an  objection  which  lately  supervened.  A 
letter  from  my  correspondent  says  that  he  is  not  satisfied  with 
my  views  of  the  subject,  and  that  he  means  to  give  me  a  fuller 
explanation  of  his  own;  intimating,  at  the  same  time,  that  I 
have  not  seized,  in  one  instance,  what  was  intended  by  him. 
These  circumstances  alone  would  render  a  public  use  of  the 
copy  in  question  indelicate  at  least.  I  must,  therefore,  under- 
take a  letter  to  yourself,  with  such  variations  as  will  make  it  a 
letter  per  se;  although  the  unsettled  state  in  which  my  health 
has  been  left  by  a  bilious  attack  during  a  late  visit  to  our  Uni- 
versity unfits  me  not  a  little  for  executing  the  task  in  the  man- 
ner that  might  be  wished. 


TO  THOMAS  Wr  GILMER. 

Sept*  6,  1830. 

DR  Sra, — I  received  by  the  last  mail  yours  of  August  31.     I 
concur  with  you  entirely  in  the  expediency  of  promoting,  as 
*  See  Post,  109,  110. 


l,)g  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1330. 

much  as  possible,  a  sympathy  between  the  incipient  and  the  fin- 
ishing establishments  provided  for  public  education;  and  in  the 
particular  expedient  you  suggest,  of  providing  for  a  complete 
education  at  the  public  expense.    Such  a  provision  made  a  part 
of  a  bill  for  the  "  diffusion  of  knowledge  "  in  the  code  prepared 
by  Mr.  Jefferson,  Mr.  Wythe,  and  Mr.  Pendleton,  between  the 
years  1776  and  1779.     The  bill  proposed  to  carry  the  selected 
youths  through  the  several  gradations  of  schools,  from  the  low- 
est to  the  highest;  and  it  deserves  consideration,  whether,  in- 
stead of  an  immediate  transition  from  the  primary  schools  to 
the  University,  it  would  not  be  better  to  substitute  a  prepara- 
tory course  at  some  intermediate  seminary,  chosen  with  the  ap- 
probation of  the  parents  or  guardians.     One  of  the  recommend- 
ations of  this  benevolent  provision  in  behalf  of  native  genius  is, 
as  you  observe,  the  nursery  it  would  form  for  competent  teach- 
ers in  the  primary  schools.   But  it  may  be  questionable  whether 
a  compulsive  destination  of  them  to  that  service  would,  in  prac- 
tice, answer  expectation.     The  other  prospects  opened  to  their 
presumed  talents  and  acquirements  might  make  them  reluctant, 
and  therefore  the  less  eligible  agents. 

As  it  is  probable  that  the  case  of  the  primary  schools  will  be 
among  the  objects  taken  up  at  the  next  session  of  the  Legisla- 
ture, I  am  glad  to  find  you  are  turning  your  attention  so  par- 
ticularly to  it,  and  that  the  aid  of  the  Faculty  is  so  attainable. 
A  satisfactory  plan  for  primary  schools  is  certainly  a  vital  de- 
sideratum in  our  Republics,  and  is  at  the  same  time  found  to  be 
a  difficult  one  everywhere.  It  might  be  useful  to  consult,  as  far 
as  there  may  be  opportunities,  the  different  modifications  pre- 
sented in  the  laws  of  different  States.  The  New  England,  New 
York,  and  Pennsylvania  examples  may  possibly  afford  useful 
hints.  There  has  lately,  I  believe,  been  a  plan  discussed,  if  not 
adopted  by  the  Legislature  of  Maryland,  where  the  situation  is 
more  analogous  than  that  of  the  more  Northern  States  to  the 
situation  of  Virginia.  The  most  serious  difficulty  in  all  the 
Southern  States  results  from  the  character  of  their  population 
and  the  want  of  density  in  the  free  part  of  it.  This  I  take  to 
be  the  main  cause  of  the  little  success  of  the  experiment  now  on 


1830.  LETTERS.  109 

foot  with  us.  I  hope  that  some  improvements  may  be  devised 
that  will  render  it  less  inadequate  to  its  object;  and  I  should 
be  proud  of  sharing  in  the  merit;  but  my  age,  the  unsettled 
state  of  my  health,  my  limited  acquaintance  with  the  local  cir- 
circumstances  to  be  accommodated,  and  my  inexperience  of  the 
principles,  dispositions,  and  views  which  prevail  in  the  Legisla- 
tive Body,  unfit  me  for  the  flattering  co-operation  you  would 
assign  me.  The  task,  I  am  persuaded,  will  be  left  in  hands 
much  better  in  all  those  respects. 

I  think,  with  you,  also,  that  it  will  be  useful  as  well  as  hon- 
orable for  the  University  that  it  should  be  understood  to  take 
a  warm  interest  in  the  primary  schools,  and  that  the  judgment 
of  those  most  immediately  connected  with  it,  and  presumably 
most  cognizant  of  the  subject  of  education,  accords  with  any 
particular  plan  for  improving  them.  But,  I  submit  for  consid- 
eration, whether  a  direct  proposition,  volunteered  from  that 
quarter,  would  not  be  less  eligible  than  such  explanations  and 
assurances  on  the  subject  as  would  be  appropriate  from  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  district  in  the  Legislative  Councils.  But  on 
this  point  your  knowledge  of  the  temper  and  sensibilities  pre- 
vailing in  them  make  you  a  better  judge  than  I  am. 


TO   EDWARD    EVERETT. 

.  September  10,  1830. 
DR  Sir, — Since  my  letter,  in  which  I  expressed  a  belief  that 
there  was  no  ground  for  supposing  that  the  Kentucky  Resolu- 
tions of  1799,  in  which  the  term  "nullification"  appears,  were 
drawn  by  Mr.  Jefferson,  I  infer  from  a  manuscript  paper  con- 
taining the  term  just  noticed,  that  although  he  probably  had  no 
agency  in  the  draft,  nor  even  any  knowledge  of  it  at  the  time, 
yet  that  the  term  was  borrowed  from  that  source.  It  may  not 
be  safe,  therefore,  to  rely  on  his  to  Mr.  W.  C.  Nicholas,  printed 
in  his  Memoir  and  Correspondence,  as  a  proof  that  he  had  no 
connexion  with,  or  responsibility  for,  the  use  of  such  a  term  on 
such  an  occasion.     Still,  I  believe  that  he  did  not  attach  to  it 


HO  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

tlie  idea  of  a  constitutional  right  in  the  sense  of  South  Caro- 
lina, but  that  of  a  natural  one  in  cases  justly  appealing  to  it. 


TO   N.   P.   TRIST. 

Montpellieb,  Septr  23d,  1830. 

DR  Sir, — Yours  of  the  21st  was  received  yesterday.  On  the 
question  of  recalling  your  communication  for  the  National  In- 
telligencer I  submit  the  following  statement: 

In  a  letter,  lately  noticed,  from  Mr.  Jefferson,  dated  Novem- 
ber 17,  1799,  lie  "  incloses  me  a  copy  of  the  draught  of  the  Ken- 
tucky Resolves"  (a  press  copy  of  his  own  manuscript.)  Not  a 
word  of  explanation  is  mentioned.  It  was  probably  sent,  and 
possibly  at  my  request,  in  consequence  of  my  being  a  member 
elect  of  the  Virginia  Legislature  of  1799,  which  would  have  to 
vindicate  its  cotemporary  Resolutions  of  '98.  It  is  remarkable 
that  the  paper  differs  both  from  the  Kentucky  Resolutions  of 
'98  and  from  those  of  '99.  It  agrees  with  the  former,  in  the 
main,  and  must  have  been  the  pattern  of  the  Resolutions  of  that 
year,  but  contains  passages  omitted  in  them,  which  employ  the 
terms  nullification  and  nullifying;  and  it  differs  in  the  quantity 
of  matter  from  the  Resolutions  of  '99,  but  agrees  with  them  in 
a  passage  which  employs  that  language,  and  would  seem  to  have 
been  the  origin  of  it.  I  conjecture  that  the  correspondent  in 
Kentucky,  Col.  George  Nicholas,  probably  might  think  it  bet- 
ter to  leave  out  particular  parts  of  the  draught  than  risk  a  mis- 
construction or  misapplication  of  them;  and  that  the  paper 
might,  notwithstanding,  be  within  the  reach  and  use  of  the 
Legislature  of  '99,  and  furnish  the  phraseology  containing  the 
term  "nullification."  Whether  Mr.  Jefferson  had  noted  the 
difference  between  his  draught  and  the  Resolufions  of  '98  (he 
could  not  have  seen  those  of  '99,  which  passed  Novr  14,)  does 
not  appear.  His  files,  particularly  his  correspondence  with 
Kentucky,  must  throw  light  on  the  whole  subject.  This  aspect 
of  the  case  seems  to  favor  a  recall  of  the  communication  if  prac- 
ticable.    Though  it  be  true  that  Mr.  Jefferson  did  not  draught 


1830.  LETTERS. 


Ill 


the  Resolutions  of '99,  yet  a  denial  of  it,  simply,  might  imply 
more  than  would  be  consistent  with  a  knowledge  of  what  is 
here  stated. 

I  find  by  a  receipt  from  Donoho,  the  collector  of  G.  &  S.,  that 
$12  will  be  due  them  on  October  19  next,  and  inclose  $10,  leav- 
ing the  addition  to  be  supplied  by  the  little  balance  from  Nich- 
olls.     But  I  am  really  ashamed  to  trouble  you  with  such  trifles. 

I  thank  you  for  the  essay  on  "  Distress  for  rent  in  Virginia." 
I  have  not  yet  read  it,  and  cannot  say  when  I  shall  be  able  to 
do  so,  though  I  anticipate  an  analytic  and  accurate  view  of  the 
subject,  instructive  to  better  lawyers  than  I  am. 


TO   MRS.   MARGARET   H.   SMITH. 

September — ,  1830. 

I  have  received,  my  dear  madam,  the  very  friendly,  and,  I 
must  add,  very  flattering  letter,  in  which  you  wish  from  my  own 
hand  some  reminiscence  marking  the  early  relations  between 
Mr.  Jefferson  and  myself,  and  involving  some  anecdote  concern- 
ing him  that  may  have  a  place  in  a  manuscript  volume  you  are 
preparing  as  a  legacy  for  your  son. 

I  was  a  stranger  to  Mr.  Jefferson  [till]  the  year  1776,  when  he 
took  his  seat  in  the  first  Legislature  under  the  Constitution  of 
Virginia,  then  newly  formed;  being  at  the  time  myself  a  mem- 
ber of  that  Body,  and  for  the  first  time  a  member  of  any  public 
Body.  The  acquaintance  made  with  him  on  that  occasion  was 
very  slight;  the  distance  between  our  ages  being  considerable, 
and  other  distances  much  more  so.  During  part  of  the  time 
whilst  he  was  Governor  of  the  State,  a  service  to  which  he  was 
called  not  long  after,  I  had  a  seat  in  the  Council,  associated 
with  him.  Our  acquaintance  then  became  intimate,  and  a 
friendship  was  formed  which  was  for  life,  and  which  was  never 
interrupted  in  the  slightest  degree  for  a  single  moment. 

Among  the  occasions  which  made  us  immediate  companions 
was  the  trip  in  1791  to  the  borders  of  Canada,  to  which  you 
refer.    According  to  an  understanding  between  us,  the  obser- 


112  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

vations  in  our  way  through  the  northern  parts  of  New  York 
and  the  newly  settled  vicinity  of  Vermont,  to  be  noted  by  him, 
were  of  a  miscellaneous  cast,  and  part  at  least  noted  on  the 
birch  bark  of  which  you  speak.  The  few  observations  devolv- 
ing on  me  related  chiefly  to  agricultural  and  economic  objects. 
On  recurring  to  them,  I  find  the  only  interest  they  contain  is  in 
the  comparison  they  may  afford  of  the  infant  State  with  the 
present  growth  of  the  settlements  through  which  we  passed; 
and  I  am  sorry  that  my  memory  does  not  suggest  any  particu- 
lar anecdote,  to  which  yours  must  have  alluded. 

The  scenes  and  subjects  which  had  occurred  during  the  ses- 
sion of  Congress  which  had  just  terminated  at  our  departure 
from  New  York,  entered  of  course  into  our  itinerary  conversa- 
tions. In  one  of  those  scenes,  a  dinner  party,  at  which  both  of 
us  were  present,  I  recollect  now,  though  not  perhaps  adverted 
to  then,  an  incident,  which,  as  it  is  characteristic  of  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son, I  will  substitute  for  a  more  exact  compliance  with  your 
request. 

The  new  Constitution  of  the  U.  States  having  been  just  put 
into  operation,  forms  of  Government  were  the  uppermost  topics 
everywhere,  more  especially  at  a  convivial  board;  and  the 
question  being  started  as  to  the  best  mode  of  providing  the 
Executive  chief,  it  was,  among  other  opinions,  boldly  advanced 
that  a  hereditary  designation  was  preferable  to  any  elective 
process  that  could  be  devised.  At  the  close  of  an  eloquent  effu- 
sion against  the  agitations  and  animosities  of  a  popular  choice, 
and  in  behalf  of  birth,  as,  on  the  whole,  affording  even  a  better 
chance  for  a  suitable  head  of  the  Government,  Mr.  Jefferson, 
with  a  smile,  remarked  that  he  had  heard  of  a  University  some- 
where in  which  the  Professorship  of  Mathematics  was  heredi- 
tary. The  reply,  received  with  acclamations,  was  a  coup  de 
grace  to  the  anti-republican  heretic. 

Whilst  your  affection  is  preparing  from  other  sources  an  in- 
structive bequest  for  your  son,  I  must  be  allowed  to  congratu- 
late him  on  the  precious  inheritance  he  will  enjoy  in  the  exam- 
ples on  which  his  filial  feelings  will  most  delight  to  dwell. 

Mrs.  Madison  failed  to  obtain  the  two  prints  she  intended 


1830.  LETTERS.  113 

for  you,  but  will  renew  her  efforts  to  fulfil  her  promise.  The 
only  drawing  of  our  house  is  that  by  Dr  Thornton,  and  is  with- 
out the  wings  now  making  part  of  it. 

Be  pleased,  my  dear  madam,  to  express  to  Mr.  Smith  the  par- 
ticular esteem  I  have  ever  felt  for  the  lights  of  his  mind  and 
the  purity  of  his  principles,  and  to  accept  for  him  and  yourself 
my  cordial  salutations.  Mrs.  M.,  who  has  lately  been  seriously 
ill,  but  is  now  recovering,  desires  me  to  assure  you  of  her  affec- 
tionate friendship,  and  joins  me  in  wishing  for  the  entire  circle 
of  your  family  every  happiness. 

Fearing  that  the  delay  may  do  me  injustice,  I  must  in  expla- 
nation remark  that  your  letter  found  me  in  a  bad  state  of 
health,  and  that  before  I  could  avail  myself  of  its  improvement 
to  dispose  of  accumulated  arrears  of  pressing  sorts,  the  illness 
of  Mrs.  M.  drew  off  my  attention  from  every  other  considera- 
tion. I  ought,  perhaps,  to  have  another  fear,  that  of  being 
charged  with  affectation  in  the  microscopic  hand  in  which  I 
write.  But  the  explanation  is  easy:  the  fingers,  stiffened  by 
age,  make  smaller  strokes,  as  the  feet  from  the  same  cause  take 
shorter  steps.     I  hope  you  will  live  to  verify  my  sincerity. 


TO   WILLIAM   WIRT. 

MoNTPELLIER,  Oct7  1,   1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  the  copy  of  your  "  address  "  to 
the  two  societies  of  Rutgers  College,  and  that  of  your  "  opin- 
ion "  on  the  case  of  the  Cherokees,  for  both  of  which  I  return 
my  thanks. 

The  address  chose,  certainly,  a  good  subject,  and  made  good 
use  of  it.  And  the  views  you  have  presented  of  the  question 
between  Georgia  and  the  Cherokees  are  a  sufficient  pledge,  if 
there  were  no  others,  to  those  sons  of  the  forest,  now  the  pupils 
of  civilization,  that  justice  will  be  done  to  their  cause,  whether 
the  forum  for  its  final  hearing  be  a  Federal  court,  the  American 
public,  or  the  civilized  world. 

I  cannot  but  regret  some  of  the  argumentative  appeals  which 

vol.  iv.  8 


114  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

have  been  made  to  the  minds  of  the  Indians.  What,  they  may 
say,  have  we  to  do  with  the  Federal  Constitution  or  the  rela- 
tions formed  by  it  between  the  Union  and  its  members?  We 
were  no  parties  to  the  compact,  and  cannot  be  affected  by  it. 
And  as  to  the  charter  of  the  King  of  England,  is  it  not  as  much 
a  mockery  to  them  as  the  Bull  of  a  Pope,  dividing  the  world 
of  discovery  between  the  Spaniards  and  the  Portuguese,  was 
held  to  be  by  the  nations  who  disowned  and  disdained  his  au. 
thority? 

The  plea,  with  the  best  aspect,  for  dispossessing  Indians  of 
the  lands  on  which  they  have  lived,  is,  that  by  not  incorporating 
their  labour,  and  associating  fixed  improvements  with  the  soil, 
they  have  not  appropriated  it  to  themselves,  nor  made  the  des- 
tined use  of  its  capacity  for  increasing  the  number  and  the  enjoy- 
ments of  the  human  race.  But  this  plea,  whatever  original  force 
be  allowed  to  it,  is  here  repelled  by  the  fact  that  the  Indians  are 
making  the  very  use  of  that  capacity  which  the  plea  requires, 
enforced  by  the  other  fact,  that  the  claimants  themselves,  by 
their  counsels,  their  authorized  and  their  effective  aids,  have 
promoted  that  happy  change  in  the  condition  of  the  Indians 
which  is  now  turned  against  them. 

The  most  difficult  problem  is,  that  of  reconciling  their  inter- 
ests with  their  rights.  It  is  so  evident  that  they  can  never  be 
tranquil  or  happy  within  the  bounds  of  a  State,  either  in  a  sep- 
arate or  subject  character,  that  a  removal  to  another  home,  if  a 
good  one  can  be  found,  may  well  be  the  wish  of  their  best 
friends.  But  the  removal  ought  to  be  made  voluntary  by  ade- 
quate inducements,  present  and  prospective;  and  no  means  ought 
to  be  grudged  which  such  a  measure  may  require. 


TO   JARED    SPARKS. 

October  5th,  1830. 
Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  July  16  was  duly  received.     The 
acknowledgment  of  it  has  awaited  your  return  from  your  tour 
to  Quebec,  which,  I  presume,  has  by  this  time  taken  place. 


1830.  LETTERS.  115 

Inclosed  is  the  exact  copy  you  wish  of  the  draught  of  an  ad- 
dress prepared  for  President  Washington,  at  his  request,  in  the 
year  1792,  when  he  meditated  a  retirement  at  the  expiration  of 
his  first  term.  You  will  observe  that  (with  a  few  verbal  excep- 
tions) it  differs  from  the  extract  enclosed  in  your  letter  only  in 
the  provisional  paragraphs,  which  had  become  inapplicable  to 
the  period  and  plan  of  his  communication  to  Col.  Hamilton. 

The  N°  of  the  North  American  Review  for  January  last  being, 
I  find,  a  duplicate,  I  return  it.  The  pages  to  which  you  refer 
throw  a  valuable  light  on  a  transaction  which  was  taking  his- 
torical root,  in  a  shape  unjust  as  well  as  erroneous.  Did  you 
ever  notice  the  "  Life  of  Mr.  Jay  "  in  Delaplaine's  biographical 
works?  The  materials  of  it  were  evidently  derived  from  the 
papers,  if  not  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  Jay,  and  are  marked  by  the 
misconceptions  into  which  he  had  fallen.  It  may  be  incidentally 
noted  as  one  of  the  confirmations  of  the  fallibility  of  Hamilton's 
memory  in  allotting  the  Nos  in  the  "  Federalist "  to  the  respect- 
ive writers,  that  one  of  them,  N°  64,  which  appears,  by  Dela- 
plaine,  to  have  been  written  by  Mr.  Jay,  as  it  certainly  was,  is 
put  on  the  list  of  Mr.  Hamilton,  as  was  not  less  certainly  the 
case  with  a  number  of  others  written  by  another  hand. 

Previous  to  the  receipt  of  your  letter  I  had  received  one  from 
Mr.  Monroe,  to  whom  I  had  mentioned  the  liberty  I  had  taken 
with  Rayneval's  memoir.  I  inclose  the  part  of  his  letter  answer- 
ing that  part  of  mine. 


TO    EDWARD    EVERETT. 

MONTPELLIER,  Oct'  7,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  favor  of  the  28th  ult.,  with 
a  copy  of  the  chapter  from  the  North  American  Review  for  this 
month.  I  have  read  the  review  of  the  Debates  with  great  pleas- 
ure. It  must  diffuse  light  on  the  subject  of  them  everywhere; 
and  would  make  an  overwhelming  impression  where  it  is  most 
needed  if  the  delirious  excitement  were  not,  it  would  seem,  an 
overmatch  for  reason  and  truth. 


116  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

The  only  inaccuracies  observable  in  my  printed  letter  are  a 
few  slight  ones,  chargeable,  probably,  on  the  transcript  from 
the  original  draught.  The  principal  one  is  an  omission  in  the 
last  paragraph  of  page  84,  of  the  words  "  with  these  distinctions 
in  view  and  "  before  the  words  "  with  an  attention  always." 
The  meaning  is  not  altered  by  the  omission,  but  without  such  a 
break  in  the  sentence  a  bungling,  if  not  obscure,  aspect  is  given 
to  it. 

You  will  excuse  me  for  suggesting  that  you  have  erred  in 
stating  that  I  wrote  the  greatest  part  of  the  "  Federalist;"  a 
greater  number  of  the  papers  were  written  by  Col.  Hamilton, 
as  will  be  seen  by  the  correct  distribution  of  them  in  the  Wash- 
ington edition,  by  Gideon.  A  very  few  of  the  numbers  were 
from  the  third  hand. 


TO   M.   VAN  BUREN. 

October  9,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  your  letter  of  July  30  in  due  time,  but 
have  taken  advantage  of  the  permitted  delay  in  answering  it. 
Although  I  have  again  turned  in  my  thoughts  the  subjects  of 
your  preceding  letter,  on  which  "any  farther  remarks  from  me 
would  be  acceptable,"  I  do  not  find  that  I  can  add  anything  ma- 
terial to  what  is  said  in  my  letter  of  July  5,  or  in  former  ones. 
Particular  cases  of  local  improvements  or  establishments  having 
immediate  relation  to  external  commerce  and  navigation  will 
continue  to  produce  questions  of  difficulty,  either  constitutional 
or  as  to  utility  or  impartiality,  which  can  only  be  decided  ac- 
cording to  their  respective  merits.  No  general  rule,  founded  on 
precise  definitions,  is,  perhaps,  possible;  certainly  none  that  re- 
lates to  such  cases  as  those  of  light-houses,  which  must  depend 
on  the  evidence  before  the  competent  authority.  In  procuring 
that  evidence,  it  will,  of  course,  be  incumbent  on  that  authority 
to  employ  means  and  precautions  most  appropriate. 

With  regard  to  the  veto  of  1817,  I  wish  it  to  be  understood 
that  I  have  no  particular  solicitude;  nor  can  the  President  be 


1830.  LETTERS.  H7 

under  any  obligation  to  notice  the  subject,  if  his  construction 
of  the  language  of  the  document  be  unchanged.  My  notice  of 
it  to  you,  when  acknowledging  the  receipt  of  the  message  you 
politely  enclosed  to  me,  Avas  necessary  to  guard  my  consistency 
against  an  inference  from  my  silence. 

With  regret  that  I  cannot  make  you  a  more  important  com- 
munication, I  renew  the  assurances  of  my  great  esteem  and  my 
cordial  salutations. 


TO    HENRY   CLAY. 

Montpellieb,  October  9,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  just  been  favoured  with  yours  of  the  22d 
ult.,  inclosing  a  copy  of  your  address  delivered  at  Cincinnati. 

Without  concurring  in  everything  that  is  said,  I  feel  what  is 
due  to  the  ability  and  eloquence  which  distinguish  the  whole. 
The  rescue  of  the  Resolutions  of  Kentucky  in  '98-'99,  from  the 
misconstructions  of  them,  was  very  apropos;  that  authority  be- 
ing particularly  relied  on  as  an  cegis  to  the  nullifying  doctrine 
which,  notwithstanding  its  hideous  aspect  and  fatal  tendency, 
has  captivated  so  many  honest  minds.  In  a  late  letter  to  one 
of  my  correspondents,  I  was  led  to  the  like  task  of  vindicating 
the  proceedings  of  Virginia  in  those  years.  I  would  gladly 
send  you  a  copy  if  I  had  a  suitable  one.  But  as  the  letter  is 
appended  to  the  North  American  Review  for  this  month,  you 
will  probably  have  an  early  opportunity  of  seeing  it. 

With  my  thanks,  sir,  for  your  obliging  communication,  I  beg 
you  to  accept  assurances  of  my  great  and  cordial  esteem,  in 
which  Mrs.  Madison  joins  me,  as  I  do  her,  in  the  best  regards 
which  she  offers  to  Mrs.  Clay. 


TO   WILLIAM   WIRT. 

October  12,  1830. 
DB  Sir, — I  have  received  yours  of  the  5th.     The  explanation 
of  your  motives  in  not  declining  the  cause  of  the  Cherokees  was 


118  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

not  needed.  Of  their  purity  it  was  impossible  for  me  to  enter- 
tain a  doubt.  From  the  aspect  of  the  public  proceedings  to- 
wards the  Indians  within  the  bounds  of  the  States,  there  is 
much  danger  that  the  character  of  our  country  will  suffer,  and 
I  do  not  know  that  any  formal  discussion  of  the  case  can  make 
it  worse,  whilst,  by  bringing  into  full  view  the  difficulties  and 
alternatives  which  beset  it,  those  proceedings  may  possibly  be 
mitigated  in  the  eyes  of  the  world. 

The  circumstance  seeming  most  to  impair  the  national  char- 
acter of  the  Indians,  is  the  admitted  restriction  on  the  sale  of 
their  lands.  May  not  the  restriction  be  regarded  as  taking  ef- 
fect against  and  through  the  purchasers?  It  is  plainly  right- 
ful against  such  as  are  subject  to  the  Government  imposing  the 
restriction,  and  made  so  against  the  subjects  of  all  the  powers 
connected  with  this  Continent,  by  the  common  understanding 
among  them,  that  the  subjects  of  each  should  in  that  respect  be 
under  the  control  of  the  others.  With  respect  to  individuals, 
if  such  there  be,  who  belong  to  powers  not  parties  to  that  sanc- 
tion, or  who  are  in  a  state  of  expatriation,  the  restriction  must 
be  resolved  into  an  interposition,  benevolent  as  well  as  provi- 
dent, against  frauds  on  the  ignorance  or  other  infirmities  char- 
acterizing the  savage  modes  of  life. 


TO   C.   J.   INGERSOLL,  CLEM.  C.  BIDDLE,   RICH.   PETERS,  COMMITTEE 
OP  THE  PENST  SOCIETY. 

J.  Madison  has  received  the  polite  invitation  of  the  "  Penn 
Society  "  to  their  anniversary  dinner  on  the  25th  instant.  Being 
under  the  necessity  of  denying  himself  the  pleasure  of  accepting 
it,  he  complies  with  the  requested  alternative  by  offering  a 
toast:  "The  immortal  memory  of  Penn,  who  subdued  the  ferocity 
of  savages  by  his  virtues,  and  enlightened  the  civilized  world 
by  his  institutions." 

MONTPELLIER,  Oct.  13,  1830. 


1830.  LETTERS.  H9 


TO 


Montpellier,  November  8,  1830. 

I  received,  rny  dear  sir,  by  the  last  mail,  yours  of  the  4th  in- 
stant. 

I  cannot  Jbut  think  that  you  have  not  fully  understood  Mr. 
Stevenson,  or,  perhaps,  that  he  has  not  fully  explained  himself, 
on  the  subject  of  the  judicial  power  of  the  United  States.  Lim- 
ited as  this  may  be  in  criminal  cases,  he  would  himself,  I  pre- 
sume, not  deny  it  in  some  of  those  you  mention,  and  for  some 
of  your  reasons  in  favour  of  it.  The  most  delicate  part  of  the 
Federal  Constitution,  and  that  on  which  candid  commentators 
are  least  unanimous,  is  the  relation  between  the  Federal  and 
State  courts,  and  the  line  dividing  the  cases  within  their  respect- 
ive jurisdictions.  It  was  not  my  purpose  to  discuss  and  dis- 
criminate these  cases,  but  to  show  the  necessity  of  a  power  to 
decide  on  conflicting  claims;  and  that  this  must  belong  to  a 
forum  under  the  general  authority,  it  being  presumed  that  this 
would  refuse  a  cognizance  of  cases  not  within  its  sphere;  and 
that  a  usurpation  of  it,  like  other  usurpations  by  that  or  by 
other  departments  of  the  Government,  would  be  open  for  what- 
ever remedies,  regular  or  extreme,  the  occasions  might  call  for. 
I  was  not  unaware  of  the  sensitiveness  of  very  many  and  the 
errors  of  not  a  few  in  this  quarter,  on  this  particular  subject, 
but  supposed  that  my  view  of  it  was  guarded  against  necessary 
offence  to  either  class.  It  would  seem,  from  several  notices  of 
it  in  the  newspapers,  that  it  has  not  been  so  fortunate.  The 
writers,  as  yet,  are  more  disposed  to  charge  it  with  a  departure 
from  the  report  of  1799  than  to  investigate  its  unconstitution- 
ality, and,  in  some  instances,  without  a  correct  exposition  of 
either  the  report  or  the  letter. 


120  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 


TO    ANDREW    STEVENSON. 

MONTPSLLIKB,  Nov.  27,  1830. 

My  dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  20th, 
with  o  just  sensibility  of  the  kind  feelings  it  expresses,  and,  I 
hope  you  will  not  doubt,  with  an  unfeigned  reciprocity  of  them. 
The  more  of  frankness  you  put  into  observations  on  the  subjects 
which  entered  into  our  late  conversations,  the  more  acceptable 
as  well  as  valuable  they  will  be,  that  being  a  quality  without 
which  no  interchange  of  thoughts  can  be  profitable  to  either 
party,  and  with  which  it  may  be  so  to  one  or  the  other,  and 
possibly  to  both. 

I  enclose  the  letter  which  particularly  complies  with  the  ob- 
ject of  yours.  The  view  it  takes  of  the  origin  and  innocence 
of  the  phrase  "common  defence  and  general  welfare"  is  what 
was  taken  in  the  Federalist  and  in  the  report  of  1799,  and,  I 
believe,  wherever  else  I  may  have  had  occasion  to  speak  of  the 
clause  containing  the  terms. 

I  have  omitted  a  vindication  of  the  true  punctuation  of  the 
clause,*  because  I  now  take  for  certain  that  the  original  docu- 
ment, signed  by  the  members  of  the  Convention,  is  in  the  De- 
partment of  State,  and  that  it  testifies  for  itself  againt  the  erro- 
neous editions  of  the  text  in  that  particular.  Should  it  appear 
that  the  document  is  not  there,  or  that  the  error  had  slipped 
into  it,  the  materials  in  my  hands  to  which  you  refer  will 
amount,  I  think,  to  a  proof  outweighing  even  that  authority. 
It  would  seem  a  little  strange,  if  the  original  Constitution  be 
in  the  Department  of  State,  that  it  has  hitherto  escaped  notice. 
But  it  is  to  be  explained,  I  presume,  by  the  fact  that  it  was  not 
among  the  papers  relating  to  the  Constitution  left  with  Gen- 
eral Washington,  and  there  deposited  by  him;  but,  having  been 
sent  from  the  Convention  to  the  old  Congress,  lay  among  the 
mass  of  papers  handed  over  on  the  expiration  of  the  latter  to 
that  Department.     On  your  arrival  at  Washington,  you  will  be 

*  This  is  also  inserted  with  the  letter.  The  letter  and  the  paper  referred  to 
are  those  which  immediately  follow— both  addressed  to  Mr.  Stevenson.— Ed. 


1830.  LETTERS.  121 

able  personally,  or  by  a  friend  having  more  leisure,  to  satisfy 
yourself  on  these  points. 

It  appears,  as  you  foretold,  that  my  letter  in  the  Northern 
Review  has  encountered  newspaper  criticism;  but  as  yet,  little, 
if  at  all,  I  believe,  on  the  ground  looked  for.  In  some  instances 
both  the  letter  and  the  report  of  1799  are  misunderstood,  and  in 
none  that  I  have  seen  has  the  distinction  been  properly  kept  in 
view  between  the  authority  of  a  higher  tribunal  to  decide  on 
the  extent  of  its  own  jurisdiction,  compared  with  that  of  other 
tribunals,  and  its  claim  of  jurisdiction  in  any  particular  case  or 
description  of  cases  as  within  that  extent;  it  being  presumed 
that,  if  not  within  the  extent  of  its  jurisdiction,  it  will  be  pro- 
nounced coram  non  jitdice;  and  it  being  understood  that,  if  not 
so,  it  will  be  a  case  of  usurpation,  and  to  be  treated  as  such. 

Mrs.  Madison  charges  me  with  her  most  affectionate  regards 
to  Mrs.  Stevenson,  in  which  I  beg  leave  to  unite  with  her,  as 
she  does  with  me,  in  cordial  salutations  and  all  good  wishes  for 
yourself. 


TO   ANDREW   STEVENSON. 

Montpelliek,  Nov.  27,  1830. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  very  friendly  favor  of  the 
20th  instant,  referring  to  a  conversation  when  I  had  lately  the 
pleasure  of  a  visit  from  you,  in  which  you  mentioned  your  belief 
that  the  terms  "  common  defence  and  general  welfare,"  in  the 
eighth  section  of  the  first  article  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  were  still  regarded  by  some  as  conveying  to  Congress  a 
substantive  and  indefinite  power,  and  in  which  I  communicated 
my  views  of  the  introduction  and  occasion  of  the  terms,  as  pre- 
cluding that  comment  on  them;  and  you  express  a  wish  that  I 
would  repeat  those  views  in  the  answer  to  your  letter. 

However  disinclined  to  tlie  discussion  of  such  topics,  at  a  time 
when  it  is  so  difficult  to  separate,  in  the  minds  of  many,  ques- 
tions purely  constitutional  from  the  party  polemics  of  the  day, 


122  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

I  yield  to  the  precedents  which  you  think  I  have  imposed  on 
myself,  and  to  the  consideration  that,  without  relying  on  my 
personal  recollections,  which  your  partiality  over-values,  I  shall 
derive  my  construction  of  the  passage  in  question  from  sources 
of  information  and  evidence  known  or  accessible  to  all  who  feel 
the  importance  of  the  subject,  and  are  disposed  to  give  it  a  pa- 
tient examination. 

In  tracing  the  history  and  determining  the  import  of  the  terms 
"  common  defence  and  general  welfare,"  as  found  in  the  text  of 
the  Constitution,  the  following  lights  are  furnished  by  the 
printed  journal  of  the  Convention  which  formed  it: 

The  terms  appear  in  the  general  propositions  offered  May 
29,  as  a  basis  for  the  incipient  deliberations,  the  first  of  which 
"Resolved,  that  the  articles  of  the  Confederation  ought  to  be  so 
corrected  and  enlarged  as  to  accomplish  the  objects  proposed 
by  their  institution,  namely,  common  defence,  security  of  liberty, 
and  general  welfare."  On  the  day  following,  the  proposition 
was  exchanged  for,  "  Resolved,  that  a  Union  of  the  States 
merely  Federal  will  not  accomplish  the  objects  proposed  by  the 
Articles  of  the  Confederation,  namely,  common  defence,  security 
of  liberty,  and  general  welfare." 

The  inference  from  the  use  here  made  of  the  terms,  and  from 
the  proceedings  on  the  subsequent  propositions,  is,  that  although 
common  defence  and  general  welfare  were  objects  of  the  Con- 
federation, they  were  limited  objects,  which  ought  to  be  en- 
larged by  an  enlargement  of  the  particular  powers  to  which 
they  were  limited,  and  to  be  accomplished  by  a  change  in  the 
structure  of  the  Union  from  a  form  merely  Federal  to  one  partly 
national;  and  as  these  general  terms  are  prefixed  in  the  like  re- 
lation to  the  several  legislative  powers  in  the  new  charter  as 
they  were  in  the  old,  they  must  be  understood  to  be  under  like 
limitations  in  the  new  as  in  the  old. 

In  the  course  of  the  proceedings  between  the  30th  of  May  and 
the  6th  of  August,  the  terms  common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare, as  well  as  other  equivalent  terms,  must  have  been  dropped; 
for  they  do  not  appear  in  the  draught  of  a  Constitution  reported 
on  that  day  by  a  committee  appointed  to  prepare  one  in  detail, 


1830.  LETTERS.  123 

the  clause  in  which  those  terms  Avere  afterward  inserted  being 
in  the  draught  simply,  "  The  Legislature  of  the  United  States 
shall  have  power  to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts,  and 
excises." 

The  manner  in  which  the  terms  became  transplanted  from 
the  old  into  the  new  system  of  Government,  is  explained  by  a 
course  somewhat  adventitiously  given  to  the  proceedings  of  the 
Convention. 

On  the  18th  of  August,  among  other  propositions  referred  to 
the  committee  which  had  reported  the  draught,  was  one  "  to 
secure  the  payment  of  the  public  debt;"  and 

On  the  same  day  was  appointed  a  committee  of  eleven  mem- 
bers, (one  from  each  State,)  "  to  consider  the  necessity  and  ex- 
pediency of  the  debts  of  the  several  States  being  assumed  by  the 
United  States." 

On  the  21st  of  August,  this  last  committee  reported  a  clause 
in  the  words  following:  "The  Legislature  of  the  United  States 
shall  have  power  to  fulfil  the  engagements  ivhich  have  been  en- 
tered into  by  Congress,  and  to  discharge  as  well  the  debts  of 
the  United  States  as  the  debts  incurred  by  the  several  States 
during  the  late  war,  for  the  common  defence  and  general  ivelfare;" 
conforming  herein  to  the  eighth  of  the  Articles  of  Confedera- 
tion, the  language  of  which  is,  that  "  all  charges  of  war,  and  all 
other  expenses  that  shall  be  incurred  for  the  common  defence 
and  general  welfare,  and  allowed  by  the  United  States  in  Con- 
gress assembled,  shall  be  defrayed  out  of  a  common  Treasury," 
<fcc. 

On  the  22d  of  August,  the  committee  of  five  reported,  among 
other  additions  to  the  clause,  "  giving  power  to  lay  and  collect 
taxes,  imposts,  and  excises,"  a  clause  in  the  words  following, 
"  for  payment  of  the  debts  and  necessary  expenses,"  with  a  pro- 
viso qualifying  the  duration  of  revenue  laws. 

This  report  being  taken  up,  it  was  moved,  as  an  amendment, 
that  the  clause  should  read,  "The  Legislature  shall  fulfil  the 
engagements  and  discharge  the  debts  of  the  United  States." 

It  was  then  moved  to  strike  out  "  discharge  the  debts,"  and 
insert,  "liquidate  the  claims;"  which  being  rejected,  the  amend- 


124  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

men t  was  agreed  to  as  proposed,  viz:  "The  Legislature  shall 
fulfil  the  engagements  and  discharge  the  debts  of  the  United 
States." 

On  the  23d  of  August  the  clause  was  made  to  read,  "  The 
Legislature  shall  fulfil  the  engagements  and  discharge  the  debts 
of  the  United  States,  and  shall  have  the  power  to  lay  and  col- 
lect taxes,  duties,  imposts,  and  excises,"  the  two  powers  relating 
to  taxes  and  debts  being  merely  transposed. 

On  the  25th  of  August  the  clause  was  again  altered  so  as  to 
read,  "  All  debts  contracted  and  engagements  entered  into  by, 
or  under  the  authority  of  Congress,  [the  Revolutionary  Con- 
gress,] shall  be  as  valid  under  this  Constitution  as  under  the 
Confederation." 

This  amendment  was  followed  by  a  proposition,  referring  to 
the  powers  to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  &c,  and  to  discharge  the 
debts,  [old  debts,]  to  add,  "  for  payment  of  said  debts,  and  for 
defraying  the  expenses  that  shall  be  incurred  for  the  common  de- 
fence and  general  welfare."  The  proposition  was  disagreed  to, 
one  State  only  voting  for  it. 

September  4,  the  committee  of  eleven  reported  the  following 
modification:  "The  Legislature  shall  have  power  to  lay  and 
collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts,  and  excises,  to  pay  the  debts  and 
provide  for  the  common  defence  and  general  welfare;"  thus  re- 
taining the  terms  of  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  and  cover- 
ing, by  the  general  term  "  debts,"  those  of  the  old  Congress. 

A  special  provision  in  this  mode  could  not  have  been  neces- 
sary for  the  debts  of  the  new  Congress;  for  a  power  to  pro- 
vide money,  and  a  power  to  perform  certain  acts,  of  which 
money  is  the  ordinary  and  appropriate  means,  must  of  course 
carry  with  them  a  power  to  pay  the  expense  of  performing  the 
acts.  Nor  was  any  special  provision  for  debts  proposed  till  the 
case  of  the  revolutionary  debts  was  brought  into  view;  and  it 
is  a  fair  presumption,  from  the  course  of  the  varied  propositions 
which  have  been  noticed,  that  but  for  the  old  debts,  and  their 
association  with  the  terms  "  common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare," the  clause  would  have  remained  as  reported  in  the  first 
draught  of  a  Constitution,  expressing  generally,  "  a  power  in 


18.10.  L  UTTERS.  125 

Congress  to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts,  and  excises/' 
without  any  addition  of  the  phrase,  "  to  provide  for  the  common 
defence  and  general  welfare."  With  this  addition,  indeed,  the 
language  of  the  clause  being  in  conformity  with  that  of  the 
clause  in  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  it  would  be  qualified, 
as  in  those  articles,  by  the  specification  of  powers  subjoined  to 
it.  But  there  is  sufficient  reason  to  suppose  that  the  terms  in 
question  would  not  have  been  introduced  but  for  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  old  debts,  with  which  they  happened  to  stand  in  a 
familiar  though  inoperative  relation.  Thus  introduced,  how- 
ever, they  passed  undisturbed  through  the  subsequent  stages  of 
the  Constitution. 

If  it  be  asked  why  the  terms  "common  defence  and  general 
welfare,"  if  not  meant  to  convey  the  comprehensive  power  which, 
taken  literally,  they  express,  were  not  qualified  and  explained 
by  some  reference  to  the  particular  powers  subjoined,  the  an- 
swer is  at  hand,  that  although  it  might  easily  have  been  done, 
and  experience  shows  it  might  be  well  if  it  had  been  done,  yet 
the  omission  is  accounted  for  by  an  inattention  to  the  phrase- 
ology, occasioned  doubtless  by  its  identity  with  the  harmless 
character  attached  to  it  in  the  instrument  from  which  it  was 
borrowed. 

But  may  it  not  be  asked  with  infinitely  more  propriety,  and 
without  the  possibility  of  a  satisfactory  answer,  why,  if  the 
terms  were  meant  to  embrace  not  only  all  the  powers  particu- 
larly expressed,  but  the  indefinite  power  which  has  been  claimed 
under  them,  the  intention  was  not  so  declared  ?  why,  on  that 
supposition,  so  much  critical  labour  was  employed  in  enumera- 
ting the  particular  powers,  and  in  defining  and  limiting  their 
extent  ? 

The  variations  and  vicissitudes  in  the  modification  of  the 
clause  in  which  the  terms  "  common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare "  appear,  are  remarkable,  and  to  be  no  otherwise  explained 
than  by  differences  of  opinion  concerning  the  necessity  or  the 
form  of  a  constitutional  provision  for  the  debts  of  the  Revolu- 
tion; some  of  the  members  apprehending  improper  claims  for 
losses  by  depeciated  emissions  of  bills  of  credit;  others  an  eva- 


126  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

sion  of  proper  claims,  if  not  positively  brought  within  the  au- 
thorized functions  of  the  new  Government;  and  others  again 
considering  the  past  debts  of  the  United  States  as  sufficiently 
secured  by  the  principle  that  no  change  in  the  Government 
could  change  the  obligations  of  the  nation.  Besides  the  indica- 
tions in  the  journal,  the  history  of  the  period  sanctions  this  ex- 
planation. 

But  it  is  to  be  emphatically  remarked,  that  in  the  multitude  of 
motions,  propositions,  and  amendments,  there  is  not  a  single  one 
having  reference  to  the  terms  "  common  defence  and  general 
welfare,"  unless  we  were  so  to  understand  the  proposition  con- 
taining them  made  on  August  25,  which  was  disagreed  to  by 
all  the  States  except  one. 

The  obvious  conclusion  to  which  we  are  brought  is,  that 
these  terms,  copied  from  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  were  re- 
garded in  the  new  as  in  the  old  instrument,  merely  as  general 
terms,  explained  and  limited  by  the  subjoined  specifications,  and 
therefore  requiring  no  critical  attention  or  studied  precaution. 

If  the  practice  of  the  revolutionary  Congress  be  pleaded  in 
opposition  to  this  view  of  the  case,  the  plea  is  met  by  the  noto- 
riety that  on  several  accounts  the  practice  of  that  body  is  not 
the  expositor  of  the  "  Articles  of  Confederation."  These  arti- 
cles were  not  in  force  till  they  were  finally  ratified  by  Mary- 
land in  1781.  Prior  to  that  event,  the  power  of  Congress  was 
measured  by  the  exigencies  of  the  war,  and  derived  its  sanction 
from  the  acquiescence  of  the  States.  After  that  event,  habit 
and  a  continued  expediency,  amounting  often  to  a  real  or  ap- 
parent necessity,  prolonged  the  exercise  of  an  undefined  author- 
ity; which  was  the  more  readily  overlooked,  as  the  members  of 
the  body  held  their  seats  during  pleasure;  as  its  acts,  particu- 
larly after  the  failure  of  the  bills  of  credit,  depended  for  their 
efficacy  on  the  will  of  the  States,  and  as  its  general  impotenc}'' 
became  manifest.  Examples  of  departure  from  the  prescribed 
rule  are  too  well  known  to  require  proof.  The  case  of  the  old 
Bank  of  North  America  might  be  cited  as  a  memorable  one. 
The  incorporating  ordinance  grew  out  of  the  inferred  necessity 
of  such  an  institution  to  carry  on  the  war,  by  aiding  the  finances, 


1830.  LETTERS.  127 

which  were  starving  under  the  neglect  or  inability  of  the  States 
to  furnish  their  assessed  quotas.  Congress  was  at  the  time  so 
much  aware  of  the  deficient  authority,  that  they  recommended 
it  to  the  State  Legislatures  to  pass  laws  giving  due  effect  to  the 
ordinance,  which  wa^s  done  by  Pennsylvania  and  several  other 
States.  In  a  little  time,  however,  so  much  dissatisfaction  arose 
in  Pennsylvania,  where  the  bank  was  located,  that  it  was  pro- 
posed to  repeal  the  law  of  the  State  in  support  of  it.  This 
brought  on  attempts  to  vindicate  the  adequacy  of  the  power  of 
Congress  to  incorporate  such  an  institution.  Mr.  Wilson, 
justly  distinguished  for  his  intellectual  powers,  being  deeply 
impressed  with  the  importance  of  a  bank  at  such  a  crisis,  pub- 
lished a  small  pamphlet,  entitled  "  Considerations  on  the  Bank 
of  North  America,"  in  which  he  endeavoured  to  derive  the 
power  from  the  nature  of  the  union  in  which  the  colonies  were 
declared  and  became  independent  States;  and  also  from  the 
tenor  of  the  "  Articles  of  Confederation  "  themselves.  But 
what  is  particularly  worthy  of  notice  is,  that  with  all  his  anx- 
ious search  in  those^  articles  for  such  a  power,  he  never  glanced 
at  the  terms  "  common  defence  and  general  welfare"  as  a  source 
of  it.  He  rather  chose  to  rest  the  claim  on  a  recital  in  the  text, 
"that,  for  the  more  convenient  management  of  the  general  in- 
terests of  the  United  States,  delegates  shall  be  annually  ap- 
pointed to  meet  in  Congress,  which,  he  said,  implied  that  the 
United  States  had  general  rights,  general  powers,  and  general 
obligations,  not  derived  from  any  particular  State,  nor  from  all 
the  particular  States  taken  separately,  but  resulting  from  the 
union  of  the  whole,"  these  general  powers  not  being  controlled 
by  the  article  declaring  that  each  State  retained  all  powers 
not  granted  by  the  articles,  because  "  the  individual  States 
never  possessed  and  could  not  retain  a  general  power  over  the 
others." 

The  authority  and  argument  here  resorted  to,  if  proving  the 
ingenuity  and  patriotic  anxiety  of  the  author  on  one  hand,  show 
sufficiently  on  the  other  that  the  terms  common  defence  and 
general  welfare  could  not,  according  to  the  known  acceptation 
of  them,  avail  his  object. 


128  WORKS     OF     MADISON.  1830. 

That  the  terms  in  question  were  not  suspected  in  the  Con- 
vention which  formed  the  Constitution  of  any  such  meaning  as 
has  been  constructively  applied  to  them,  may  be  pronounced 
with  entire  confidence;  for  it  exceeds  the  possibility  of  belief, 
that  the  known  advocates  in  the  Convention  for  a  jealous  grant 
and  cautious  definition  of  Federal  powers  should  have  silently 
permitted  the  introduction  of  words  or  phrases  in  a  sense  ren- 
dering fruitless  the  restrictions  and  definitions  elaborated  by 
them. 

Consider  for  a  moment  the  immeasurable  difference  between 
the  Constitution  limited  in  its  powers  to  the  enumerated  ob- 
jects, and  expounded  as  it  would  be  by  the  import  claimed  for 
the  phraseology  in  question.  The  difference  is  equivalent  to 
two  Constitutions,  of  characters  essentially  contrasted  with  each 
other — the  one  possessing  powers  confined  to  certain  specified 
cases,  the  other  extended  to  all  cases  whatsoever;  for  what  is 
the  case  that  would  not  be  embraced  by  a  general  power  to 
raise  money,  a  power  to  provide  for  the  general  welfare,  and  a 
power  to  pass  all  laws  necessary  and  proper  to  carry  these 
powers  into  execution;  all  such  provisions  and  laws  superseding, 
at  the  same  time,  all  local  laws  and  constitutions  at  variance 
with  them  ?  Can  less  be  said,  with  the  evidence  before  us  fur- 
nished by  the  journal  of  the  Convention  itself,  than  that  it  is 
impossible  that  such  a  Constitution  as  the  latter  would  have 
been  recommended  to  the  States  by  all  the  members  of  that 
body  whose  names  were  subscribed  to  the  instrument? 

Passing  from  this  view  of  the  sense  in  which  the  terms  com- 
mon defence  and  general  welfare  were  used  by  the  framers  of 
the  Constitution,  let  us  look  for  that  in  which  they  must  have 
been  understood  by  the  Conventions,  or,  rather,  by  the  people, 
who,  through  their  Conventions,  accepted  and  ratified  it.  And 
here  the  evidence  is,  if  possible,  still  more  irresistible,  that  the 
terms  could  not  have  been  regarded  as  giving  a  scope  to  Fed- 
eral legislation  infinitely  more  objectionable  than  any  of  the 
specified  powers  which  produced  such  strenuous  opposition,  and 
calls  for  amendments  which  might  be  safeguards  against  the 
dangers  apprehended  from  them. 


1830.  LETTERS.  120 

Without  recurring  to  the  published  debates  of  those  Conven- 
tions, which,  as  far  as  they  can  be  relied  on  for  accuracy,  would, 
it  is  believed,  not  impair  the  evidence  furnished  by  their  re- 
corded proceedings,  it  will  suffice  to  consult  the  list  of  amend- 
ments proposed  by  such  of  the  Conventions  as  considered  the 
powers  granted  to  the  new  Government  too  extensive  or  not 
safely  defined. 

Besides  the  restrictive  and  explanatory  amendments  to  the 
text  of  the  Constitution,  it  may  be  observed,  that  a  long  list 
was  premised,  under  the  name  and  in  the  nature  of  "  declara- 
tions of  rights;  "  all  of  them  indicating  a  jealousy  of  the  Federal 
powers,  and  an  anxiety  to  multiply  securities  against  a  con- 
structive enlargement  of  them.  But  the  appeal  is  more  partic- 
ularly made  to  the  number  and  nature  of  the  amendments  pro- 
posed to  be  made  specific  and  integral  parts  of  the  constitu- 
tional text. 

No  less  than  seven  States,  it  appears,  concurred  in  adding  to 
their  ratifications  a  series  of  amendments  which  they  deemed 
requisite.  Of  these  amendments,  nine  were  proposed  by  the 
Convention  of  Massachusetts,  five  by  that  of  South  Carolina, 
twelve  by  that  of  New  Hampshire,  twenty  by  that  of  Virginia, 
tMrty-three  by  that  of  New  York,  twenty-six  by  that  of  North 
Carolina,  twenty-one  by  that  of  Rhode  Island. 

Here  are  a  majority  of  the  States  proposing  amendments,  in 
one  instance  thirty-three  by  a  single  State;  all  of  them  intended 
to  circumscribe  the  powers  granted  to  the  General  Government, 
by  explanations,  restrictions,  or  prohibitions,  without  including 
a  single  pi^oposition  from  a  single  State  referring  to  the  terms 
common  defence  and  general  welfare;  which,  if  understood  to 
convey  the  asserted  power,  could  not  have  failed  to  be  the  power 
most  strenuously  aimed  at,  because  evidently  more  alarming  in 
its  range  than  all  the  powers  objected  to  put  together;  and  that 
the  terms  should  have  passed  altogether  unnoticed  by  the  many 
eyes  which  saw  danger  in  terms  and  phrases  employed  in  some 
of  the  most  minute  and  limited  of  the  enumerated  powers,  must 
be  regarded  as  a  demonstration  that  it  was  taken  for  granted 
that  the  terms  were  harmless,  because  explained  and  limited,  as 

vol.  iv.  9 


130  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

in  the  "  Articles  of  Confederation,"  by  the  enumerated  powers 
which  followed  them. 

A  like  demonstration  that  these  terms  were  not  understood 
in  any  sense  that  could  invest  Congress  with  powers  not  other- 
wise bestowed  by  the  constitutional  charter,  may  be  found  in 
what  passed  in  the  first  session  of  the  first  Congress,  when  the 
subject  of  amendments  was  taken  up,  with  the  concilia  lory  view 
of  freeing  the  Constitution  from  objections  which  had  been 
made  to  the  extent  of  its  powers,  or  to  the  unguarded  terras  em- 
ployed in  describing  them.  Not  only  were  the  terms  "common 
defence  and  general  welfare "  unnoticed  in  the  long  list  of 
amendments  brought  forward  in  the  outset,  but  the  journals  of 
Congress  show  that,  in  the  progress  of  the  discussions,  not  a 
single  proposition  was  made  in  either  branch  of  the  Legislature 
which  referred  to  the  phrase  as  admitting  a  constructive  en- 
largement of  the  granted  powers,  and  requiring  an  amendment 
guarding  against  it.  Such  a  forbearance  and  silence  on  such 
an  occasion,  and  among  so  many  members  who  belonged  to  the 
part  of  the  nation  which  called  for  explanatory  and  restrictive 
amendments,  and  who  had  been  elected  as  known  advocates  for 
them,  cannot  be  accounted  for  without  supposing  that  the  terms 
"common  defence  and  general  welfare"  were  not  at  that  time 
deemed  susceptible  of  any  such  construction  as  has  since  been 
applied  to  them. 

It  may  be  thought,  perhaps,  due  to  the  subject,  to  advert  to 
a  letter  of  October  5,  1787,  to  Samuel  Adams,  and  another  of 
October  16,  of  the  same  year,  to  the  Governor  of  Virginia,  from 
R.  H.  Lee,  in  both  of  which  it  is  seen  that  the  terms  had  at- 
tracted his  notice,  and  were  apprehended  by  him  "  to  submit  to 
Congress  every  object  of  human  legislation."  But  it  is  partic- 
ularly worthy  of  remark,  that,  although  a  member  of  the  Senate 
of  the  United  States  when  amendments  of  the  Constitution  were 
before  that  house,  and  sundry  additions  and  alterations  were 
there  made  to  the  list  sent  from  the  other,  no  notice  was  taken 
of  those  terms  as  pregnant  with  danger.  It  must  be  inferred, 
that  the  opinion  formed  by  the  distinguished  member  at  the  first 
view  of  the  Constitution,  and  before  it  had  been  fully  discussed 


1830.  LETTERS.  131 

and  elucidated,  had  been  changed  into  a  conviction  that  the 
terras  did  not  fairly  admit  the  construction  he  had  originally 
put  on  them,  and  therefore  needed  no  explanatory  precaution 
against  it. 

Allow  me,  my  dear  sir,  to  express  on  this  occasion,  what  I  al- 
ways feel,  an  anxious  hope  that,  as  our  Constitution  rests  on  a 
middle  ground  between  a  form  wholly  national  and  one  merely 
federal,  and  on  a  division  of  the  powers  of  Government  between 
the  States  in  their  united  character  and  in  their  individual  char- 
acters, this  peculiarity  of  the  system  will  be  kept  in  view,  as  a 
key  to  the  sound  interpretation  of  the  instrument,  and  a  warning 
against  any  doctrine  that  would  either  enable  the  States  to  in- 
validate the  powers  of  the  United  States,  or  confer  all  power 
on  them. 

I  close  these  remarks,  which  I  fear  may  be  found  tedious, 
with  assurances  of  my  great  esteem  and  best  regards. 


Memorandum  not  used  in  letter  to  Mr.  Stevenson. 

These  observations  will  be  concluded  with  a  notice  of  the  ar- 
gument in  favour  of  the  grant  of  a  full  power  to  provide  for 
common  defence  and  general  welfare,  drawn  from  the  punctua- 
tion in  some  editions  of  the  Constitution. 

According  to  one  mode  of  presenting  the  text,  it  reads  as  fol- 
lows: "  Congress  shall  have  power — To  lay  and  collect  taxes, 
duties,  imposts,  and  excises;  to  pay  the  debts  and  provide  for 
the  common  defence  and  general  welfare  of  the  United  States; 
but  all  duties,  imposts,  and  excises,  shall  be  uniform."  To  an- 
other mode,  the  same  with  commas  vice  semicolons. 

According  to  the  other  mode,  the  text  stands  thus:  "Con- 
gress shall  have  power;  To  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  im- 
posts, and  excises:  To  pay  the  debts  and  provide  for  the  com- 
mon defence  and  general  welfare  of  the  United  States;  but  all 
duties,  imposts,  and  excises  shall  be  uniform  throughout  the 
United  States." 

And  from  this  view  of  the  text,  it  is  inferred  that  the  latter 


132  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

sentence  conveys  a  distinct  substantive  power  to  provide  for 
the  common  defence  and  general  welfare. 

Without  inquiring  how  far  the  text  in  this  form  would  con- 
vey the  power  in  question;  or  admitting  that  any  mode  of  pre- 
senting or  distributing  the  terms  could  invalidate  the  evidence 
which  lias  been  exhibited,  that  it  was  not  the  intention  of  the 
general  or  of  the  State  Coventions  to  express,  by  the  use  of  the 
terms  common  defence  and  general  welfare,  a  substantive  and 
indefinite  power;  or  to  imply  that  the  general  terms  were  not 
to  be  explained  and  limited  by  the  specified  powers  succeeding 
them,  in  like  manner  as  they  were  explained  and  limited  in  the 
former  Articles  of  Confederation  from  which  the  terms  were 
taken;  it  happens  that  the  authenticity  of  the  punctuation  which 
preserves  the  unity  of  the  clause  can  be  as  satisfactorily  shown, 
as  the  true  intention  of  the  parties  to  the  Constitution  has  been 
shown  in  the  language  used  by  them. 

The  only  instance  of  a  division  of  the  clause  afforded  by  the 
journal  of  the  Convention  is  in  the  draught  of  a  Constitution 
reported  by  a  committee  of  five  members,  and  entered  on  the 
12th  of  September. 

But  that  this  must  have  been  an  erratum  of  the  pen  or  of  the 
press,  may  be  inferred  from  the  circumstance,  that,  in  a  copy  of 
that  report,  printed  at  the  time  for  the  use  of  the  members,  and 
now  in  my  possession,  the  text  is  so  printed  as  to  unite  the  parts 
in  one  substantive  clause;  an  inference  favoured  also  by  a  pre- 
vious report  of  September  4,  by  a  committee  of  eleven,  in  which 
the  parts  of  the  clause  are  united,  not  separated. 

And  that  the  true  reading  of  the  Constitution,  as  it  passed,  is 
that  which  unites  the  parts,  is  abundantly  attested  by  the  fol- 
lowing facts: 

1.  Such  is  the  form  of  the  text  in  the  Constitution  printed  at 
the  close  of  the  Convention,  after  being  signed  by  the  members, 
of  which  a  copy  is  also  now  in  my  possession. 

2.  The  case  is  the  same  in  the  Constitution  from  the  Conven- 
tion to  the  old  Congress,  as  printed  on  their  journal  of  Septem- 
ber 28,  1787,  and  transmitted  by  that  body  to  the  Legislatures 
of  the  several  States. 


1830.  LETTERS.  133 

3.  The  case  is  the  same  in  the  copies  of  the  transmitted  Con- 
stitution, as  printed  by  the  ratifying  States,  several  of  which 
have  been  examined;  and  it  is  a  presumption  that  there  is  no 
variation  in  the  others. 

The  text  is  in  the  same  form  in  an  edition  of  the  Constitution 
published  in  1814,  by  order  of  the  Senate;  as  also  in  the  Con- 
stitution as  prefixed  to  the  edition  of  the  laws  of  the  United 
States;  in  fact,  the  proviso  for  uniformity  is  itself  a  proof  of 
identity  of  them. 

It  might,  indeed,  be  added,  that  in  the  journal  of  September 
14,  the  clause  to  which  the  proviso  was  annexed,  now  a  part  of 
the  Constitution,  viz :  "  but  all  duties,  imposts,  and  excises,  shall 
be  uniform  throughout  the  United  States,"  is  called  the  "first," 
of  course  a  "single"  clause.  And  it  is  obvious  that  the  uni- 
formity required  by  the  proviso  implies  that  what  it  referred  to 
was  a  part  of  the  same  clause  witli  the  proviso,  not  an  antece- 
dent clause  altogether  separated  from  it. 

Should  it  be  not  contested  that  the  original  Constitution,  in 
its  engrossed  or  enrolled  state,  with  the  names  of  the  subscri- 
bing members  affixed  thereto,  presents  the  text  in  the  same 
form,  that  alone  must  extinguish  the  argument  in  question. 

If,  contrary  to  every  ground  of  confidence,  the  text,  in  its 
original  enrolled  document,  should  not  coincide  with  these  mul- 
tiplied examples,  the  first  question  would  be  of  comparative 
probability  of  error,  even  in  the  enrolled  document,  and  in  the 
number  and  variety  of  the  concurring  examples  in  opposition 
to  it. 

And  a  second  question,  whether  the  construction  put  on  the 
text,  in  any  of  its  forms  or  punctuations,  ought  to  have  the 
weight  of  a  feather  against  the  solid  and  diversified  proofs 
which  have  been  pointed  out,  of  the  meaning  of  the  parties  to 
the  Constitution. 


134  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

Supplement  to  the  letter  of  November  27,  1830,  to  A.  Stevenson, 
on  the  phrase  "  common  defence  and  general  welfare" — On  the 
'power  of  indefinite  appropriation  of  money  by  Congress. 

It  is  not  to  be  forgotten,  that  a  distinction  has  been  intro- 
duced between  a  power  merely  to  appropriate  money  to  the 
common  defence  and  general  welfare,  and  a  power  to  employ  all 
the  means  of  giving  full  effect  to  objects  embraced  by  the  terms. 

1.  The  first  observation  to  be  here  made  is,  that  an  express 
power  to  appropriate  money  authorized  to  be  raised,  to  objects 
authorized  to  be  provided  for,  could  not,  as  seems  to  have  been 
supposed,  be  at  all  necessary;  and  that  the  insertion  of  the 
power  "  to  pay  the  debts,"  &c.  is  not  to  be  referred  to  that 
cause.  It  has  been  seen,  that  the  particular  expression  of  the 
power  originated  in  a  cautious  regard  to  debts  of  the  United 
States  antecedent  to  the  radical  change  in  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment; and  that,  but  for  that  consideration,  no  particular  expres- 
sion of  an  appropriating  power  would  probably  have  been  thought 
of.  An  express  power  to  raise  money,  and  an  express  power 
(for  example)  to  raise  an  army,  would  surely  imply  a  power  to 
use  the  money  for  that  purpose.  And  if  a  doubt  could  possibly 
arise  as  to  the  implication,  it  would  be  completely  removed  by 
the  express  power  to  pass  all  laws  necessary  and  proper  in  such 
cases. 

2.  But  admitting  the  distinction  as  alleged,  the  appropriating 
power  to  all  objects  of  "  common  defence  and  general  welfare" 
is  itself  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  render  the  preceding  views 
of  the  subject  applicable  to  it.  Is  it  credible  that  such  a  power 
would  have  been  unnoticed  and  unopposed  in  the  Federal  Con- 
vention? in  the  State  Conventions,  which  contended  for,  and 
proposed  restrictive  and  explanatory  amendments?  and  in  the 
Congress  of  1789,  which  recommended  so  many  of  these  amend- 
ments? A  power  to  impose  unlimited  taxes  for  unlimited  pur- 
poses could  never  have  escaped  the  sagacity  and  jealousy  which 
were  awakened  to  the  many  inferior  and  minute  powers  which 
were  criticised  and  combated  in  those  public  bodies. 

3.  A  power  to  appropriate  money,  without  a  power  to  apply 


1830.  LETTERS.  135 

it  in  execution  of  the  object  of  appropriation,  could  have  no 
effect  but  to  lock  it  up  from  public  use  altogether;  and  if  the 
appropriating  power  carries  with  it  the  power  of  application 
and  execution,  the  distinction  vanishes.  The  power,  therefore, 
means  nothing,  or  what  is  worse  than  nothing,  or  it  is  the  same 
thing  with  the  sweeping  power  "  to  provide  for  the  common  de- 
fence and  general  welfare." 

4.  To  avoid  this  dilemma,  the  consent  of  the  States  is  intro- 
duced as  justifying  the  exercise  of  the  power  in  the  full  extent 
within  their  respective  limits.  But  it  would  be  a  new  doctrine, 
that  an  extra-constitutional  consent  of  the  parties  to  a  Consti- 
tution could  amplify  the  jurisdiction  of  the  constituted  Govern- 
ment. And  if  this  could  not  be  done  by  the  concurring  consents 
of  all  the  States,  what  is  to  be  said  of  the  doctrine  that  the  con- 
sent of  an  individual  State  could  authorize  the  application  of 
money  belonging  to  all  the  States  to  its  individual  purposes? 
Whatever  be  the  presumption  that  the  Government  of  the  whole 
would  not  abuse  such  an  authority  by  a  partiality  in  expending 
the  public  treasure,  it  is  not  the  less  necessary  to  prove  the  ex- 
istence of  the  power.  The  Constitution  is  a  limited  one,  pos- 
sessing no  power  not  actually  given,  and  carrying  on  the  face 
of  it  a  distrust  of  power  beyond  the  distrust  indicated  by  the 
ordinary  forms  of  free  Government. 

The  peculiar  structure  of  the  Government,  which  combines 
an  equal  representation  of  unequal  numbers  in  one  branch  of 
the  Legislature,  with  an  equal  representation  of  equal  numbers 
in  the  other,  and  the  peculiarity  which  invests  the  Government 
with  selected  powers  only,  not  intrusting  it  even  with  every 
power  withdrawn  from  the  local  governments,  prove  not  only 
an  apprehension  of  abuse  from  ambition  or  corruption  in  those 
administering  the  Government,  but  of  oppression  or  injustice 
from  the  separate  interests  or  views  of  the  constituent  bodies 
themselves,  taking  effect  through  the  administration  of  the  Gov- 
ernment. These  peculiarities  were  thought  to  be  safeguards 
due  to  minorities  having  peculiar  interests  or  institutions  at 
stake,  against  majorities  who  might  be  tempted  by  interest  or 
other  motives  to  invade  them;  and  all  such  minorities,  however 


736  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

composed,  act  with  consistency  in  opposing  a  latitude  of  con- 
struction, particularly  that  which  has  been  applied  to  the  terms 
"  common  defence  and  general  welfare,"  which  would  impair  the 
security  intended  for  minor  parties.  Whether  the  distrustful 
precaution  interwoven  in  the  Constitution  was  or  was  not  in 
every  instance  necessary;  or  how  far,  with  certain  modifications, 
any  farther  powers  might  be  safely  and  usefully  granted,  are 
questions  which  were  open  for  those  who  framed  the  great  Fed- 
eral Charter,  and  are  still  open  to  those  who  aim  at  improving 
it.  But  while  it  remains  as  it  is,  its  true  import  ought  to  be 
faithfully  observed;  and  those  who  have  most  to  fear  from  con- 
structive innovations  ought  to  be  most  vigilant  in  making  head 
against  them. 

But  it  would  seem  that  a  resort  to  the  consent  of  the  State 
Legislatures,  as  a  sanction  to  the  appropriating  power,  is  so  far 
from  being  admissible  in  this  case,  that  it  is  precluded  by  the 
fact  that  the  Constitution  has  expressly  provided  for  the  cases 
where  that  consent  was  to  sanction  and  extend  the  power  of  the 
national  Legislature.  How  can  it  be  imagined  that  the  Consti- 
tution, when  pointing  out  the  cases  where  such  an  effect  was  to 
be  produced,  should  have  deemed  it  necessary  to  be  positive 
and  precise  with  respect  to  such  minute  spots  as  forts,  &c,  and 
have  left  the  general  effect  ascribed  to  such  consent  to  an  argu- 
mentative, or,  rather,  to  an  arbitrary  construction?  And  here 
again  an  appeal  may  be  made  to  the  incredibility  that  such  a 
mode  of  enlarging  the  sphere  of  federal  legislation  should  have 
been  unnoticed  in  the  ordeals  through  which  the  Constitution 
passed,  by  those  who  were  alarmed  at  many  of  its  powers  bear- 
ing no  comparison  with  that  source  of  power  in  point  of  im- 
portance. 

5.  Put  the  case  that  money  is  appropriated  to  a  canal*  to  be 

*  On  more  occasions  than  one,  it  has  been  noticed  in  Congressional  debates 
that  propositions  appear  to  have  been  made  in  the  Convention  of  1787  to  give  to 
Congress  the  power  of  opening  canals,  and  to  have  been  rejected;  and  that  Mr- 
Hamilton,  when  contending  in  his  report  in  favour  of  a  bank  for  a  liberal  con- 
struction of  the  powers  of  Congress,  admitted  that  a  canal  might  be  beyond  the 
reach  of  those  powers. 


1830.  LETTERS.  137 

cut  within  a  particular  State;  how  and  by  whom,  it  may  bo 
asked,  is  the  money  to  be  applied  and  the  work  to  be  executed? 
By  agents  under  the  authority  of  the  General  Government?  then 
the  power  is  no  longer  a  mere  appropriating  power.  By  agents 
under  the  authority  of  the  States?  then  the  State  becomes  either 
a  branch  or  a  functionary  of  the  Executive  authority  of  the 
United  States;  an  incongruity  that  speaks  for  itself. 

6.  The  distinction  between  a  pecuniary  power  only,  and  a 
plenary  power  "  to  provide  for  the  common  defence  and  general 
welfare,"  is  frustrated  by  another  reply  to  which  it  is  liable. 
For  if  the  clause  be  not  a  mere  introduction  to  the  enumerated 
powers,  and  restricted  to  them,  the  power  to  provide  for  the 
common  defence  and  general  welfare  stands  as  a  distinct  sub- 
stantive power,  the  first  on  the  list  of  legislative  powers;  and 
not  only  involving  all  the  powers  incident  to  its  execution,  but 
coming  within  the  purview  of  the  clause  concluding  the  list, 
which  expressly  declares  that  Congress  may  make  all  laws  ne- 
cessary and  proper  to  carry  into  execution  the  foregoing  powers 
vested  in  Congress. 

The  result  of  this  investigation  is,  that  the  terms  "  common 
defence  and  general  welfare  "  owed  their  induction  into  the 
text  of  the  Constitution  to  their  connexion  in  the  "  Articles  of 
Confederation,"  from  which  they  were  copied,  with  the  debts 
contracted  by  the  old  Congress,  and  to  be  provided  for  by  the 
new  Congress;  and  are  used  in  the  one  instrument  as  in  the 
other,  as  general  terms,  limited  and  explained  by  the  particular 
clauses  subjoined  to  the  clause  containing  them;  that  in  this 
light  they  were  viewed  throughout  the  recorded  proceedings  of 
the  Convention  which  framed  the  Constitution;  that  the  same 
was  the  light  in  which  they  were  viewed  by  the  State  Conven- 
tions which  ratified  the  Constitution,  as  is  shown  by  the  records 
of  their  proceedings;  and  that  such  was  the  case  also  in  the  first 
Congress  under  the  Constitution,  according  to  the  evidence  of 
their  journals,  when  digesting  the  amendments  afterward  made 
to  the  Constitution.  It  equally  appears  that  the  alleged  power 
to  appropriate  money  to  the  "  common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare" is  either  a  dead  letter,  or  swells  into  an  unlimited  power 


138  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

to  provide  for  unlimited  purposes,  by  all  the  means  necessary 
and  proper  for  those  purposes.  And  it  results  finally,  that  if 
the  Constitution  does  not  give  to  Congress  the  unqualified 
power  to  provide  for  the  common  defence  and  general  welfare, 
the  defect  cannot  be  supplied  by  the  consent  of  the  States,  un- 
less given  in  the  form  prescribed  by  the  Constitution  itself  for 
its  own  amendment. 

As  the  people  of  the  United  States  enjoy  the  great  merit  of 
having  established  a  system  of  Government  on  the  basis  of  hu- 
man rights,  and  of  giving  to  it  a  form  without  example,  which, 
as  they  believe,  unites  the  greatest  national  strength  with  the 
best  security  for  public  order  and  individual  liberty,  they  owe 
to  themselves,  to  their  posterity,  and  to  the  world,  a  preserva- 
tion of  the  system  in  its  purity,  its  symmetry,  and  its  authen- 
ticity. This  can  only  be  done  by  a  steady  attention  and  sacred 
regard  to  the  chartered  boundaries  between  the  portion  of  power 
vested  in  the  Government  over  the  whole,  and  the  portion  un- 
divested  from  the  several  Governments  over  the  parts  compos- 
ing the  whole;  and  by  a  like  attention  and  regard  to  the  bound- 
aries between  the  several  departments,  Legislative,  Executive, 
and  Judiciary,  into  which  the  aggregate  power  is  divided. 
Without  a  steady  eye  to  the  landmarks  between  these  depart- 
ments, the  danger  is  always  to  be  apprehended,  either  of  mutual 
encroachments  and  alternate  ascendencies  incompatible  with  the 
tranquil  enjoyment  of  private  rights,  or  of  a  concentration  of 
all  the  departments  of  power  into  a  single  one,  universally  ac- 
knowledged to  be  fatal  to  public  liberty. 

And  without  an  equal  watchfulness  over  the  great  landmarks 
between  the  General  Government  and  the  particular  Govern- 
ments, the  danger  is  certainly  not  less,  of  either  a  gradual  re- 
laxation of  the  band  which  holds  the  latter  together,  leading 
to  an  entire  separation,  or  of  a  gradual  assumption  of  their 
powers  by  the  former,  leading  to  a  consolidation  of  all  the  Gov- 
ernments into  a  single  one. 

The  two  vital  characteristics  of  the  political  system  of  the 
United  States  are,  first,  that  the  Government  holds  its  powers 
by  a  charter  granted  to  it  by  the  people;  second,  that  the  pow- 


1830.  LETTERS.  I39 

ers  of  Government  are  formed  into  two  grand  divisions — one 
vested  in  a  Government  over  the  whole  community,  the  other 
in  a  number  of  independent  Governments  over  its  component 
parts.  Hitherto  charters  have  been  written  grants  of  privileges 
by  Governments  to  the  people.  Here  they  are  written  grants 
of  power  by  the  people  to  their  Governments. 

Hitherto,  again,  all  the  powers  of  Government  have  been,  in 
effect,  consolidated  into  one  Government,  tending  to  faction  and 
a  foreign  yoke  among  a  people  within  narrow  limits,  and  to  ar- 
bitrary rule  among  a  people  spread  over  an  extensive  region. 
Here  the  established  system  aspires  to  such  a  division  and  or- 
ganization of  power  as  will  provide  at  once  for  its  harmonious 
exercise  on  the  true  principles  of  liberty  over  the  parts  and 
over  the  whole,  notwithstanding  the  great  extent  of  the  whole; 
the  system  forming  an  innovation  and  an  epoch  in  the  science 
of  Government  not  less  honorable  to  the  people  to  whom  it 
owed  its  birth,  than  auspicious  to  the  political  welfare  of  all 
others  who  may  imitate  or  adopt  it. 

As  the  most  arduous  and  delicate  task  in  this  great  work  lay 
in  the  untried  demarkation  of  the  line  which  divides  the  gen- 
eral and  the  particular  Governments  by  an  enumeration  and 
definition  of  the  powers  of  the  former,  more  especially  the  legis- 
lative powers;  and  as  the  success  of  this  new  scheme  of  polity 
essentially  depends  on  the  faithful  observance  of  this  partition 
of  powers,  the  friends  of  the  scheme,  or  rather  the  friends  of 
liberty  and  of  man,  cannot  be  too  often  earnestly  exhorted  to 
be  watchful  in  marking  and  controling  encroachments  by  either 
of  the  Governments  on  the  domain  of  the  other. 


TO   J.    K.    TEFFT. 

December  3d,  1830. 

Sir, — In  the  year  1828  I  received  from  J.  V.  Bevan  sundry 

numbers  of  the  "  Savannah  Georgian,"  containing  continuations 

of  the  notes  of  Major  Pierce  in  the  Federal  Convention  of  1787. 

They  were  probably  sent  on  account  of  a  marginal  suggestion 


140  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1830. 

of  inconsistency  between  language  held  by  me  in  the  Conven- 
tion with  regard  to  the  Executive  veto,  and  the  use  made  of  the 
power  by  myself,  when  in  the  Executive  Administration.  The 
inconsistency  is  done  away  by  the  distinction,  not  adverted  to, 
between  an  absolute  veto,  to  which  the  language  was  applied, 
and  the  qualified  veto  which  was  exercised. 


TO   JAMES   MAURY. 

Montpellier,  Dec*  10,  1830. 

My  dear  Sir, — Your  intelligent  and  interesting whom 

I  had  the  pleasure  of  seeing  in  Richmond  during  the  Conven- 
tion, and  should  have  seen  with  greater  pleasure  at  Montpelier, 
has  probably  given  you  some  account  of  the  proceedings  of  that 
body,  which  had  occasional  aspects  a  little  ominous,  but  which 
terminated  in  a  Constitution,  which  few  deny  to  be  a  great  im- 
provement of  the  old  one,  though  not  a  few  beyond  the  mount- 
ains murmur  at,  as  short  of  a  just  reform.  In  the  northwestern 
counties  on  the  Ohio,  there  has  been  so  much  excitement,  that  a 
project  was  formed  to  annex  themselves  to  the  State  of  Mary- 
land; but  there  is  little  danger  that  it  will  be  pursued  into 
serious  consequences.  The  most  disagreeable  feature  in  our 
general  affairs  is  the  discontent  in  the  Southern  States,  Vir- 
ginia included,  with  the  Tariff  and  the  expenditures  on  Roads 
and  Canals.  In  South  Carolina  the  spirit  has  been  so  violent, 
as  to  engender  doctrines  of  the  most  menacing  tendency.  Hap- 
pily she  is  not  supported  in  them,  even  by  the  States  most  sym- 
pathizing with  her  complaints,  and  I  trust  all  our  difficulties 
will  gradually  yield  to  the  patriotic  considerations  which  have 
been  so  remedial  in  former  instances. 


1830.  LETTERS. 


141 


TO    GENERAL   LA    FAYETTE. 

Montpelliek,  Dec'  12,  1830. 

My  dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  July  10th.  by  Ruggi,  was  lately 
forwarded  to  me.  He  is  now  at  Charlottesville,  hoping  that  he 
will  not  suffer  from  a  credulity,  jusqu'a  bonhommie,  and  calling 
on  me  "  eveiller  l'apathie  nationalc."  I  have  reminded  him  of 
the  error,  apparently  without  remedy,  of  his  precipitancy  in  the 
outset,  and  of  his  perseverance  for  so  many  years  without  seek- 
ing the  information  on  which  it  ought  to  have  depended.  I 
have  communicated  the  case,  including  your  letter,  to  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson Randolph,  and  my  readiness  to  aid  in  any  thing  that  may 
be  deemed  proper.  But  I  am  sure  that,  in  the  existing  circum- 
stances of  the  country,  nothing  can  be  done  or  prudently  at- 
tempted in  pursuance  of  the  original  object. 

I  have  hitherto  forborne,  my  dear  friend,  to  add  to  the  episto- 
lary mass  with  which  you  could  not  fail  to  be  overwhelmed;  well 
assured  that  you  need  not  be  told  how  much  I  have  felt  with  you, 
and  for  you,  in  the  crisis  produced  by  the  three  glorious  days 
of  July.  The  reception  given  to  the  event  here  is  shown  by  the 
celebrations  in  the  towns  which  have  spoken  for  the  nation. 
Your  friends  were  aware  of  your  delicate  relation  to  the  choice 
of  a  substitute  for  the  dethroned  Government.  I  believe  I  may 
say,  that  with  few,  if  any,  exceptions,  they  had  more  confidence^ 
in  your  patriotic  discretion  than  in  their  own  pretensions  to 
judge  on  the  question.  And  now  that  your  view  of  it  is  known, 
they  take  for  granted  that  what  was  best  to  be  done  is  what 
was  done.  For  myself,  Republican  as  I  am,  I  easily  conceive 
that  the  Constitutional  Monarchy  adopted  may  be  as  necessary 
to  the  actual  condition  of  France,  internal  and  external,  as  Mr. 
Jefferson  thought  the  system  which  left  Louis  XVI  on  the  throne 
was  an  eligible  accommodation  to  the  then  state  of  things. 
It  may,  also,  be  more  easy,  if  expedient,  to  descend  to  a  more 
popular  form  than  to  control  the  tendency  of  a  premature  ex- 
periment to  confusion,  and  its  usual  result,  in  arbitrary  Govern- 
ment. If  all  hereditary  ingredients  were  to  be  dispensed  with, 
a  federal  mixture  would  present  itself  as  worthy  of  favorable 


142  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

consideration.  I  have  been  confirmed  in  my  original  opinion, 
that  it  will  improve  any  Republic,  and  that  it  is  essential  to 
one  in  a  country  like  France.  If,  on  one  hand,  more  of  central 
authority  would  be  required  by  the  powerful  nations  bearing  on 
her,  on  the  other  the  same  peculiarity  would  operate  in  con- 
trolling the  self-sufficiency  and  centrifugal  tendency  of  the  com- 
ponent parts,  and  permit  a  greater  share  of  local  authority  to 
be  safely  left  with  them.  Our  system  is  occasionally  producing 
questions  concerning  the  boundary  between  the  General  and  the 
local  governments.  A  late  one,  little  anticipated,  has  sprung 
up  in  South  Carolina,  where  a  right  in  a  single  State  to  annul 
an  act  of  Congress  is  maintained  with  a  warmth  proportioned 
to  its  want  of  strength.  Strange  as  the  doctrine  is,  it  has  led 
to  a  serious  discussion,  embracing  other  constitutional  topics. 
I  have  been  drawn  into  it  by  appeals  to  the  proceedings  of  Vir- 
ginia on  a  former  occasion,  in  which  I  bore  a  noted  part;  and 
would  send  you  a  pamphlet,  to  which  is  appended  what  I  had  to 
say,  but  that  you  ought  not  to  be  abstracted  for  a  moment  from 
the  great  task  on  hand.  In  the  contingency  of  a  practical  ques- 
tion of  a  Government  involving  the  element  of  Federalism, 
every  light  reflected  from  our  experiment  may  have  a  degree  of 
interest.  Mrs.  Madison  values  too  much  your  kind  remem- 
brances not  to  offer  the  sincerest  returns  of  them.  Heaven 
bless  you,  my  dear  friend,  and  the  cause  to  which  you  are  your- 
self a  blessing. 


TO   RICHARD   RUSH. 

1831. 

I  thank  you,  my  dear  sir,  for  the ,  kindly  put  un- 
der a  cover  to  me.  It  derives  particular  interest  from  the  col- 
umns subscribed  "  Temple."  I  had  seen  the  preceding,  bearing 
that  felicitous  name,  with  a  ready  inference  of  the  real  one. 

The  general  character  of  the  Whig  party  in  England  is  as 
eloquently  painted  as  the  position  and  perplexity  of  its  leaders 
now  in  power  are  accurately  delineated.   There  is  certainly  too 


1831.  LETTERS.  143 

much  of  nobility,  though  it  be  Whig  nobility,  in  the  Administra- 
tion, to  flatter  the  popular  hopes;  and  too  much  of  the  spirit  of 
the  last  in  the  head  of  it  to  meet  that  of  the  nation  on  any 
ground  on  which  reform  can  be  stationary.  Much,  however, 
will  depend,  for  a  time,  at  least,  on  external  experiments  and 
examples.  The  Government  in  its  actual  form  of  King,  Lords, 
and  Commons,  is  stronger  in  the  opinions  and  feelings  of  the 
people  than  that  of  any  of  the  absolute  Monarchies;  and  though 
not  so  strong  as  these  in  military  establishments,  (as  long  as  the 
materials  of  such  establishments  can  be  relied  on,)  it  is  more  so 
in  the  moral  and  political  apparatus  which  upholds  it.  Little 
time  will  substitute  certainty  for  conjectures  as  to  the  course 
which  the  pilot  will  steer;  whether  little  or  much  will  be  re- 
quired to  determine  the  port  that  will  finally  be  entered  is  less 
certain. 

We  were  disappointed,  as  well  as  sorry,  to  hear  of  your  mi- 
gration in  a  Northern  direction,  before,  with  Mrs.  Rush,  you 
had  made  the  promised  trip  in  the  opposite  one.  The  distance, 
however,  is  not  such  as  to  make  us  despond  of  that  gratifica- 
tion. In  the  mean  time,  Mrs.  Madison  unites  in  renewed  assur- 
ances to  you  both  of  our  affectionate  remembrances  and  of  all 
our  best  wishes. 


TO   REYNOLDS    CHAPMAN. 

January  6,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  yours,  enclosing  the  manuscript 
of  J.  M.  Patton,  on  the  subject  of  which  it  is  intimated  that  my 
opinion  would  be  acceptable. 

The  paper  affords  sufficient  indication  of  the  talents  ascribed 
to  the  author.  Of  his  honourable  principles  I  believe  no  one 
doubts.  And  with  these  qualifications  for  serving  his  country, 
it  may  be  well  for  it  that  he  is  making  its  institutions  and  inter- 
ests objects  ot  systematic  attention.  It  is  with  pleasure,  therefore, 
that  I  comply,  however  imperfectly,  with  the  request  in  your 
letter,  regretting  only  that  the  compliance  is  so  imperfect,  and 


144  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

that  it  may  less  accord  in  some  respects  with  the  ideas  of  Mr. 
Patton  than  might  be  agreeable  to  both  of  us.  I  am  persuaded, 
nevertheless,  that  his  candour  will  be  equal  to  my  frankness. 

For  my  opinion  on  a  tariff  for  the  encouragement  of  domestic 
manufactures  I  may  refer  to  my  letters  to  Mr.  Cabell  in  1828, 
which  will  show  the  ground  on  which  I  maintained  its  consti- 
tutionality. It  avoids  the  question  quo  animo?  in  using  an 
impost  for  another  purpose  than  revenue;  a  question  which, 
though  not  in  such  a  case  within  a  judicial  purview,  would  be 
asked  and  pressed  in  discussions  appealing  to  public  opinion. 

If  a  duty  can  be  constitutionally  laid  on  imports,  not  for  the 
purpose  of  revenue,  which  may  be  reduced  or  destroyed  by  the 
duty,  but  as  a  means  of  retaliating  the  commercial  regulations 
of  foreign  countries,  which  regulations  have  for  their  object, 
sometimes  their  sole  object,  the  encouragement  of  their  manu- 
factures, it  would  seem  strange  to  infer  that  an  impost  for  the 
encouragement  of  domestic  manufactures  was  unconstitutional 
because  it  was  not  for  the  purpose  of  revenue;  and  the  more 
strange,  as  an  impost  for  the  protection  and  encouragement  of 
national  manufactures  is  of  much  more  general  and  familiar 
practice  than  as  a  retaliation  of  the  injustice  of  foreign  regula- 
tions of  commerce.  It  deserves  consideration  whether  there  be 
not  other  cases  in  which  an  impost,  not  for  revenue,  must  be 
admitted,  or  necessary  interests  be  provided  for  by  a  more 
strained  construction  of  the  specified  powers  of  Congress. 

With  respect  to  the  existing  tariff,  however  justly  it  may  be 
complained  of  in  several  respects,  I  cannot  but  view  the  evils 
charged  on  it  as  greatly  exaggerated.  One  cause  of  the  ex- 
citement is  an  impression  with  many,  that  the  whole  amount 
paid  by  the  consumers  goes  into  the  pockets  of  the  manufac- 
turers; while  that  is  the  case  so  far  only  as  the  articles  are  ac- 
tually manufactured  in  the  country,  which  in  some  instances  is 
in  a  very  inconsiderable  proportion,  the  residue  of  the  amount 
passing,  like  other  taxes,  into  the  public  treasury,  and  to  be  re- 
placed, if  withdrawn,  by  other  taxe3.  The  other  cause  is  the 
unequal  operation  of  the  tax,  resulting  from  an  unequal  con- 
sumption of  the  article  paying  it  in  different  sections;  and  in 


1831.  LETTERS.  145 

some  instances,  this  is  doubtless  a  striking  effect  of  the  existing 
tariff.  But,  to  make  a  fair  estimate  of  the  evil,  it  must  be  in- 
quired how  far  the  sections,  overburdened  in  some  instances,  may 
not  be  underburdened  in  others,  so  as  to  diminish,  if  not  remove, 
the  inequality.  Unless  a  tariff  be  a  compound  one,  it  cannot, 
in  such  a  country  as  this,  be  made  equal  either  between  differ- 
ent sections  or  among  different  classes  of  citizens;  and  as  far  as 
a  compound  tariff  can  be  made  to  approach  equality,  it  must  be 
by  such  modifications  as  will  balance  inequalities  against  each 
other.  The  consumption  of  coarse  woollens  used  by  the  negroes 
in  the  South  may  be  greater  than  in  the  North,  and  the  tariff 
on  them  be  disproportionately  felt  in  that  section.  Before  the 
change  in  the  duties  on  tea,  coffee,  and  molasses,  the  greater 
consumption  elsewhere  of  these  articles,  and  of  the  article  of 
sugar,  from  habit,  and  a  population  without  slaves,  might  have 
gone  far  towards  equalizing  the  burden;  possibly  have  exceeded 
that  effect. 

Be  this  as  it  may,  I  cannot  but  believe,  whatever  well-founded 
complaints  may  be  against  the  tariff,  that,  as  a  cause  of  the  gen- 
oral  sufferings  of  the  country,  it  has  been  vastly  overrated;  that, 
if  wholly  repealed,  the  limited  relief  would  be  a  matter  of  sur- 
prise; and  that,  if  the  portion  only  having  not  revenue,  but 
manufactures,  for  its  object,  were  struck  off,  the  general  relief 
would  be  little  felt. 

In  looking  for  the  great  and  radical  causes  of  the  pervading 
embarrassments,  they  present  themselves  at  once:  1.  In  the  fall 
almost  to  prostration  in  the  price  of  land,  evidently  the  effect 
of  the  quantity  of  cheap  Western  land  in  the  market.  2.  In 
the  depreciating  effect  in  the  products  of  land,  from  the  in- 
creased products  resulting  from  the  rapid  increase  of  popula- 
tion, and  the  transfer  of  labour  from  a  less  productive  to  a 
more  productive  soil,  not  in  effect  more  distant  from  the  com- 
mon markets. 

It  is  not  wonderful  that  the  price  of  tobacco  should  fall  when 
the  export  through  New  Orleans  has  for  the  last  three  years 
added  an  annual  average  of  near  thirty  thousand  hogsheads  to 
the  export  of  the  old  tobacco  States,  or  that  the  price  of  cotton 

vol.  iv.  10 


146  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

should  have  felt  a  like  effect  from  like  causes.  It  lias  been  ad- 
mitted by  the  "  Southern  Review,"  that  the  fall  of  cotton  oc- 
curred prior  even  to  the  tariff  of  1824.  The  prices  of  both 
tobacco  and  flour  have  had  a  greater  fall  than  that  of  cotton. 

To  this  solution  of  the  problem  of  the  depressed  condition  of 
the  country  may  be  added  the  fact,  not  peculiar  to  Virginia, 
that  the  fall  in  the  prices  of  land  and  its  products  found  the 
people  much  in  debt,  occasioned  by  the  tempting  liberality 
of  the  banks  and  the  flattering  anticipations  of  crops  and 
prices. 

It  may  not  be  out  of  place  to  observe,  that  in  deciding  the 
general  question  of  a  protective  policy,  the  public  opinion  is  in 
danger  of  being  unduly  influenced  by  the  actual  state  of  things, 
as  it  may  happen  to  be  a  period  of  war  or  of  peace.  In  the 
former  case,  the  departure  from  the  "  let  alone  "  theory  may  be 
pressed  too  far.  In  the  latter,  the  fair  exceptions  to  it  may  be 
too  much  disregarded.  The  remark  will  be  verified  by  compar- 
ing the  public  opinion  on  the  subject,  during  the  late  war  and 
at  the  close  of  it,  with  the  change  produced  by  the  subsequent 
period  of  peace.  It  cannot  be  doubted,  that  on  the  return  of  a 
state  of  war,  even  should  the  United  States  not  be  a  party,  the 
reasonings  against  the  protection  of  certain  domestic  manufac- 
tures would  lose  much  of  the  public  favour,  perhaps  too  much, 
considering  the  increased  ability  of  the  United  States  to  pro- 
tect their  foreign  commerce,  which  would  greatly  diminish  the 
risks  and  expense  of  transportation,  though  not  the  war  prices 
in  the  manufacturing  countries. 

For  my  general  opinion  on  the  question  of  internal  improve- 
ments I  may  refer  to  the  veto  message  against  the  "  Bonus  Bill," 
at  the  close  of  the  session  of  Congress  in  March,  1817.  The 
message  denies  the  constitutionality  as  well  of  the  appropriating 
as  of  the  executing  and  jurisdictional  branches  of  the  power. 
And  my  opinion  remains  the  same,  subject,  as  heretofore,  to  the 
exception  of  particular  cases,  where  a  reading  of  the  Constitu- 
tion different  from  mine  may  have  derived  from  a  continued 
course  of  practical  sanctions  an  authority  sufficient  to  overrule 
individual  constructions. 


1831.  LETTERS.  147 

It  is  not  to  be  wondered  that  doubts  and  difficulties  should 
occur  in  expounding  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 
Hitherto  the  aim,  in  well-organized  Governments,  has  been  to 
discriminate  and  distribute  the  legislative,  executive,  and  judi- 
ciary powers;  and  these  sometimes  touch  so  closely,  or,  rather, 
run  the  one  so  much  into  the  other,  as  to  make  the  task  difficult 
and  leave  the  lines  of  division  obscure.  A  settled  practice,  en- 
lightened by  occurring  cases,  and  obviously  conformable  to  the 
public  good,  can  alone  remove  the  obscurity.  The  case  is  par- 
allel in  new  statutes  on  complex  subjects. 

In  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  where  each  of  these 
powers  is  divided,  and  portions  allotted  to  different  govern- 
ments, and  where  a  language  technically  appropriate  may  be 
deficient,  the  wonder  would  be  far  greater  if  different  rules  of 
exposition  were  not  applied  to  the  text  by  different  commenta- 
tors. 

Thus  it  is  found  that,  in  the  case  of  the  legislative  depart- 
ment particularly,  where  a  division  and  definition  of  the  powers 
according  to  their  specific  objects  is  most  difficult,  the  instru- 
ment is  read  by  some  as  if  it  were  a  Constitution  for  a  single 
Government,  with  powers  coextensive  with  the  general  welfare, 
and  by  others  interpreted  as  if  it  were  an  ordinary  statute,  and 
with  the  strictness  almost  of  a  penal  one. 

Between  these  adverse  constructions  an  intermediate  course 
must  be  the  true  one;  and  it  is  hoped  that  it  will  finally,  if  not 
otherwise  settled,  be  prescribed  by  an  amendment  of  the  Con- 
stitution. In  no  case  is  a  satisfactory  one  more  desirable  than 
in  that  of  internal  improvements,  embracing  roads,  canals,  light- 
houses, harbours,  rivers,  and  other  lesser  objects. 

With  respect  to  post  roads,  the  general  view  taken  of  them 
in  the  manuscript  shows  a  way  of  thinking  on  the  subject  with 
which  mine  substantially  accords.  Roads,  when  plainly  neces- 
sary for  the  march  of  troops  and  for  military  transportations, 
must  speak  for  themselves  as  occasions  arise. 

Canals,  as  an  item  in  the  general  improvement  of  the  coun- 
try, have  always  appeared  to  me  not  to  be  embraced  by  the  au- 


148  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

thority  of  Congress.  It  may  be  remarked  that  Mr.  Hamilton, 
in  his  Report  on  the  Bank,  when  enlarging  the  range  of  con- 
struction to  the  utmost  of  his  ingenuity,  admitted  that  canals 
were  beyond  the  sphere  of  Federal  legislation. 

Light-houses  having  a  close  and  obvious  relation  to  naviga- 
tion and  external  commerce,  and  to  the  safety  of  public  as  well 
as  private  ships,  and  having  received  a  positive  sanction  and 
general  acquiescence  from  the  commencement  of  the  Federal 
Government,  the  constitutionality  of  them  is,  I  presume,  not  now 
to  be  shaken,  if  it  were  ever  much  contested.  It  seems,  how- 
ever, that  the  power  is  liable  to  great  abuse,  and  to  call  for  the 
most  careful  and  responsible  scrutiny  into  every  particular  case 
before  an  application  be  complied  with. 

Harbours,  within  the  above  character,  seem  to  have  a  like 
claim  on  the  Federal  authority.  But  what  an  interval  between 
such  a  harbour  as  that  of  New  York  or  New  Orleans  and  the 
mouth  of  a  creek  forming  an  outlet  for  the  trade  of  a  single 
State  or  part  of  a  State  into  a  navigable  stream,  and  the  prin- 
ciple of  which  would  authorize  the  improvement  of  every  road 
leading  out  of  the  State  towards  a  destined  market? 

What,  again,  the  interval  between  clearing  of  its  sawyers 
<fec,  the  Mississippi,  the  commercial  highway  for  half  the  nation, 
and  removing  obstructions  by  which  the  navigation  of  an  incon- 
siderable stream  may  be  extended  a  few  miles  only  within  a 
single  State? 

The  navigation  of  the  Mississippi  is  so  important  in  a  national 
view,  so  essentially  belongs  to  the  foreign  commerce  of  many 
States,  and  the  task  of  freeing  it  from  obstructions  is  so  much 
beyond  the  means  of  a  single  State,  and  beyond  a  feasible  con- 
cert of  all  who  are  interested  in  it,  that  claims  on  the  authority 
and  resources  of  the  nation  will  continue  to  be,  as  they  have 
been,  irresistible.  Those  who  regard  it  as  a  case  not  brought 
by  these  features  within  the  legitimate  powers  of  Congress,  must, 
of  course,  oppose  the  claim,  and  with  it  every  inferior  claim. 
Those  who  admit  the  power  as  applicable  to  a  case  of  that  de- 
scription, but  disown  it  in  every  case  not  marked  by  adequate 


1831.  LETTERS.  149 

peculiarities,  must  find,  as  they  can,  a  line  separating  this  ad- 
missible class  from  the  others;  a  necessity  but  too  often  to  be 
encountered  in  a  legislative  career. 

Perhaps  I  ought  not  to  omit  the  remark,  that  although  I  con- 
cur in  the  defect  of  powers  in  Congress  on  the  subject  of  internal 
improvements,  my  abstract  opinion  has  been,  that,  in  the  case  of 
canals  particularly,  the  power  would  have  been  properly  vested 
in  Congress.  It  was  more  than  once  proposed  in  the  Conven- 
tion of  1787,  and  rejected  from  an  apprehension,  chiefly,  that  it 
might  prove  an  obstacle  to  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution. 
Such  an  addition  to  the  Federal  powers  was  thought  to  be 
strongly  recommended  by  several  considerations:  1.  As  Con- 
gress would  possess,  exclusively,  the  sources  of  revenue  most 
productive  and  least  unpopular,  that  body  ought  to  provide  and 
apply  the  means  for  the  greatest  and  most  costly  works.  2. 
There  would  be  cases  where  canals  would  be  highly  important 
in  a  national  view,  and  not  so  in  a  local  view.  3.  Cases  where, 
though  highly  important  in  a  national  view,  they  might  violate 
the  interest,  real  or  supposed,  of  the  State  through  which  they 
would  pass,  of  which  an  example  might  now  be  cited  in  the 
Chesapeake  and  Delaware  canal,  known  to  have  been  viewed 
in  an  unfavourable  light  by  the  State  of  Delaware.  4.  There 
might  be  cases  where  canals,  or  a  chain  of  canals,  would  pass 
through  sundry  States,  and  create  a  channel  and  outlet  for  their 
foreign  commerce,  forming  at  the  same  time  a  ligament  for  the 
Union,  and  extending  the  profitable  intercourse  of  its  members, 
and  yet  be  of  hopeless  attainment  if  left  to  the  limited  faculties 
and  joint  exertions  of  the  States  possessing  the  authority. 

It  cannot  be  denied,  that  the  abuse  to  which  the  exercise  of 
the  power  in  question  has  appeared  to  be  liable  in  the  hands  of 
Congress  is  a  heavy  weight  in  the  scale  opposed  to  it.  But 
may  not  the  evil  have  grown,  in  a  great  degree,  out  of  a  casual 
redundancy  of  revenue,  and  a  temporary  apathy  to  a  burden 
bearing  indirectly  on  the  people,  and  mingled,  moreover,  with 
the  discharge  of  debts  of  peculiar  sanctity?  It  might  not  hap- 
pen, under  ordinary  circumstances,  that  taxes  even  of  the  most 
disguised  kind  would  escape  a  wakeful  control  on  the  imposi- 


150  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

tion  and  application  of  tlicm.  The  late  reduction  of  duties  on 
certain  imports,  and  the  calculated  approach  of  an  extinguish- 
ment of  the  public  debt,  have  evidently  turned  the  popular  at- 
tention to  the  subject  of  taxes,  in  a  degree  quite  new;  and  it  is 
more  likely  to  increase  than  to  relax.  In  the  event  of  an  amend- 
ment of  the  Constitution,  guards  might  be  devised  against  a 
misuse  of  the  power  without  defeating  an  important  exercise  of 
it.  If  I  err  or  am  too  sanguine  in  the  views  I  indulge,  it  must 
be  ascribed  to  my  conviction  that  canals,  railroads,  and  turn- 
pikes are  at  once  the  criteria  of  a  wise  policy  and  causes  of  na- 
tional prosperity;  that  the  want  of  them  will  be  a  reproach  to 
our  republican  system,  if  excluding  them;  and  that  the  exclusion, 
to  a  mortifying  extent,  will  ensue,  if  the  power  be  not  lodged 
where  alone  it  can  have  its  due  effect. 

Be  assured  of  my  great  esteem,  and  accept  my  cordial  salu- 
tations. 


TO    STEPHEN   BATES. 

January  24th,  1831. 
Dear  Sir, — I  received,  long  ago,  your  interesting  favor  on 
the  31st  of  October,  with  a  pamphlet  referred  to,  and  I  owe  an 
apology  for  not  sooner  acknowledging  it.  I  hope  it  will  be  a 
satisfactory  one  that  the  state  of  my  health,  crippled  by  a  severe 
rheumatism,  restricted  my  attention  to  what  seemed  to  have 
immediate  claims  upon  it,  and  in  that  light  I  did  not  view  the 
subject  of  your  communication,  ignoraut,  as  I  was,  of  the  true 
character  of  Masonry,  and  little  informed,  as  I  was,  of  the 
grounds  on  which  its  extermination  was  contended  for;  and  in- 
capable as  I  was,  and  am,  in  my  situation  of  investigating  the 
controversy.  I  never  was  a  Mason,  and  no  one,  perhaps,  could 
be  more  a  stranger  to  the  principles,  rites,  and  fruits  of  the  in- 
stitution. I  had  never  regarded  it  as  dangerous  or  noxious; 
nor,  on  the  other  hand,  as  deriving  importance  from  anything 
publicly  known  of  it.     From  the  number  and  character  of  those 


1831.  LETTERS.  151 

who  now  support  the  charges  against  Masonry,  I  cannot  doubt 
that  it  is  at  least  susceptible  of  abuses  outweighing  any  advan- 
tages promised  by  its  patrons. 

With  this  apologetic  explanation.  I  tender  you  my  respectful 
and  cordial  salutations. 


TO    ROBERT   WALSH. 

Jant  25,  1831. 

Sir, — The  National  Gazette  of  Jan7 contained  a  publi- 
cation, edited  since  in  a  pamphlet  form,  from  two  sons  of  the 
late  Mr.  Bayard,  its  object  being  to  vindicate  the  memory  of 
their  father  against  certain  passages  in  the  writings  of  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson. 

The  filial  anxiety  which  prompted  the  publication  was  natu- 
ral and  highly  commendable.  But  it  is  to  be  regretted  that,  in 
performing  that  duty,  they  have  done  great  injustice  to  the 
memory  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  by  the  hasty  and  limited  views  taken 
of  the  evidence  deducible  from  the  sources  to  which  they  had 
appealed. 

The  first  passage  on  which  they  found  their  charges  is  in  the 
following  words: 

"February  12,  1801. — Edward  Livingston  tells  me  that 
Bayard  applied  to-day,  or  last  night,  to  General  Smith,  and 
represented  to  him  the  expediency  of  coming  over  to  the  States 
who  vote  for  Burr;  that  there  was  nothing  in  the  way  of  ap- 
pointment which  he  might  not  command,  and  particularly  men- 
tioned the  Secretaryship  of  the  Navy.  Smith  asked  him  if  he 
was  authorized  to  make  the  offer.  He  said  he  was  authorized. 
Smith  told  this  to  Livingston,  and  to  Wilson  Carey  Nicholas, 
who  confirms  it  to  me,"  &c.  [See  Jefferson's  Memoirs,  vol.  4, 
p.  515.] 

From  this  statement  it  appears  that  Mr.  Jefferson  was  told 
by  Mr.  Livingston,  that  he  had  it  from  General  Smith,  that  Mr. 
Bayard  had  applied  to  him  [General  Smith]  with  an  offer  of  a 
high  appointment,  if  he  would  come  over  from  the  Jefferson 


152  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

party  and  join  that  of  the  rival  candidate  for  the  Presidency. 
It  appears  that  this  information  of  Mr.  Livingston  was  con- 
firmed to  Mr.  JeiTerson  by  Mr.  W.  C.  Nicholas,  who  also  said 
he  had  it  from  General  Smith.  It  appears  that  the  communica- 
tion thus  made  to  Mr.  Jefferson  was  reduced  by  him  to  writing 
on  the  day  on  which  it  was  made;  and  that  the  incident  which 
was  the  subject  of  it  took  place  on  the  morning  of  the  same 
day,  or,  at  farthest,  on  the  night  before.  It  is  found,  also,  that 
what  was  in  this  case  reduced  to  writing,  made  no  part  of  what 
was  first  reduced  to  writing  on  15th  Ap1,  1806,  (see  vol.  4,  p. 
521,)  but  that  it  was  then  expressly  referred  to,  as  having  been 
reduced  to  writing  at  the  time. 

Opposed  to  this  Memorandum  of  Mr.  Jefferson  is:  1.  The 
declaration  of  Mr.  Livingston  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  of  the 
U.  States,  after  a  lapse  of  about  twenty-nine  years,  "  that  as  to 
the  precise  question  put  to  him,  [touching  the  application  of  Mr. 
Bayard  to  General  Smith,]  he  must  say,  that,  having  taxed  his 
recollection  as  far  as  it  could  go,  on  so  remote  a  transaction,  he 
had  no  remembrance  of  it;"  implying  that  he  might  have  had  a 
conversation  with  Mr.  Jefferson  relating  to  the  remote  transac- 
tion, not  within  the  scope  of  the  precise  question.  2.  The  dec- 
laration of  General  Smitli  in  the  same  place,  and  after  the  same 
lapse  of  time,  "  that  he  had  not  the  most  distant  recollection 
that  Mr.  Bayard  had  ever  made  such  a  proposition  to  him;'' 
adding,  "  that  he  never  received  from  any  man  such  a  proposi- 
tion." 

On  comparing  these  declarations,  made  after  an  interval  of 
so  many  years,  with  the  statement  of  Mr.  Jefferson  reduced  to 
writing,  at  the  time,  it  is  impossible  to  regard  them  as  proof 
that  communications  were  not  made  to  him  by  Mr.  Livingston 
and  Mr.  W.  C.  Nicholas,  which  he  [Mr.  Jefferson]  understood 
to  import  that  Mr.  Bayard  had  made  to  General  Smitli  the  ap- 
plication as  stated.  And  if  Mr.  Jefferson  was  under  that  im- 
pression, however  erroneous  it  might  be,  his  subsequent  opinion 
and  language  in  reference  to  Mr.  Bayard  are  at  once  accounted 
for,  without  any  resort  to  the  imputations  in  the  publication. 

That  there  has  been  great  error  somewhere  is  apparent;  that 


1831.  LETTERS.  153 

respect  for  the  several  parties  requires  it  to  be  viewed  as  invol- 
untary, must  be  admitted;  that,  being  involuntary,  it  must  have* 
proceeded  from  misapprehensions  or  failures  of  memory;  that, 
there  having  been  no  interval  for  the  failure  of  the  memory  of 
Mr.  Jefferson,  the  error,  if  with  him,  must  be  ascribed  to  misap- 
prehensions. The  resulting  question,  therefore,  is  between  the 
probability  of  misapprehensions  by  Mr.  Jefferson  of  the  state- 
ments made  to  him  at  the  same  time  by  Mr.  Livingston  and  Mr. 
Nicholas,  and  the  probability  of  misapprehensions  or  failures 
of  memory  in  some  one  or  more  of  the  other  parties.  And  the 
decision  of  this  question  must  be  left  to  an  unbiased  and  intel- 
ligeut  public. 

The  other  passage  is  at  page  521,  vol.  4,  of  the  Memoirs,  and 
is  as  follows,  under  date  of  April  15,  1806.  Referring  to  a  pre- 
vious conversation  with  Col.  Burr,  he  says: 

"I  did  not  commit  these  things  to  writing  at  the  time,  but  I 
do  it  now,  because,  in  a  suit  between  him  [Col.  Burr]  and 
Cheetham,  he  had  a  deposition  of  Mr.  Bayard  taken,  which 
seems  to  have  no  relation  to  the  suit,  nor  to  any  other  object 
than  to  calumniate  me.  Bayard  pretends  to  have  addressed  to 
me,  during  the  pending  of  the  Presidential  election  in  Feby, 
1801,  through  General  Samuel  Smith,  certain  conditions  on 
which  my  election  might  be  obtained;  and  that  General  Smith, 
after  conversing  with  me,  gave  answers  for  me.  This  is  abso- 
lutely false.  No  proposition  of  any  kind  was  ever  made  to  me 
on  that  occasion  by  General  Smith,  nor  any  answer  authorized 
by  me,  and  this  fact  General  Smith  affirms  at  this  moment." 

The  reply  given  to  this  memorandum  by  the  authors  of  the 
publication  is  a  refeHence  to  the  depositions  of  Mr.  Bayard  and 
General  Smith  in  the  cause  of  Gillespie  and  Smith. 

It  appears  that  Mr.  Jefferson,  attending  merely  to  the  matter 
of  Mr.  Bayard's  deposition,  did  not  distinguish  between  the 
suit  of  Burr  and  Cheetham  and  that  of  Gillespie  and  Smith,  in 
the  latter  of  which  the  deposition  of  General  Smith  as  well  as 
that  of  Mr.  Bayard  was  taken. 

The  part  of  the  deposition  of  Mr.  Bayard  referred  to  by  Mr. 
Jefferson  is  as  follows: 


154  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

"I  [Mr.  B.]  told  him  [General  Smith]  I  should  not  be  satisfied, 
nor  agree  to  yield,  till  I  had  the  assurance  from  Mr.  Jefferson 
himself;  but  if  he  [General  Smith]  would  consult  Mr.  Jefferson, 
and  bring  the  assurance  from  him,  the  election  should  be  ended. 
The  General  made  no  difficulty  in  consulting  Mr.  Jefferson,  and 
proposed  giving  me  his  answer  the  next  morning.  The  next 
day,  upon  our  meeting,  General  Smith  informed  me  that  he  had 
seen  Mr.  Jefferson  and  stated  to  him  the  points  mentioned,  and 
was  authorized  by  him  to  say  that  they  corresponded  with  his 
vieivs  and  intentions,  and  that  he  [Mr.  B.]  might  confide  in  him 
accordingly.  The  opposition  of  Vermont,  &c,  &c,  was  imme- 
diately withdrawn,  and  Mr.  Jefferson  made  President  by  the 
vote  of  ten  States." 

Here  it  is  explicitly  stated,  on  the  authority  of  General  Smith, 
that  an  assurance,  in  the  nature  of  a  pledge,  was  authorized  by 
Mr.  Jefferson  to  be  given  to  Mr.  Bayard,  that  he  [Mr.  Jeffer- 
son] would  conform  to  the  conditions  on  which  his  election  was 
to  be  obtained. 

The  terms  used  by  Mr.  Jefferson  in  denouncing  the  fact  de- 
posed by  Mr.  Bayard  are  accounted  for  by  the  odious  light  in 
which  it  presented  itself;  by  his  consciousness  that  he  had  never 
authorized  it;  by  the  impressions,  unfavorable  to  Mr.  Bayard* 
which  had  been  made  upon  him  by  the  information,  as  he  under- 
stood it,  given  him  by  Mr.  Livingston  and  Mr.  Nicholas;  and 
especially  by  the  denial  of  the  fact  by  General  Smith  at  the 
moment. 

Certain  it  is,  that  there  is  a  direct  contrariety  between  the 
deposition  of  Mr.  Bayard  and  the  memorandum  of  Mr.  Jefferson, 
involving  a  question  between  General  Smith  and  Mr.  Bayard  on 
the  one  hand,  and  between  Mr.  Jefferson  and  General  Smith  on 
the  other. 

That  Mr.  Bayard  understood  General  Smith  to  have  borne  an 
authorized  pledge  from  Mr.  Jefferson,  is  attested  by  the  fact 
that  he  proceeded  forthwith  to  execute  the  purpose  of  which 
such  a  pledge  was  the  condition. 

Passing  to  the  deposition  of  General  Smith,  given  twelve 
days  after  that  of  Mr.  Bayard,  and  on  the  same  day  on  which 


1831.  LETTERS.  155 

the  memorandum  of  Mr.  Jefferson  is  dated,  let  it  be  seen  what 
light  is  furnished  by  that  document. 

The  assertion  of  Mr.  Jefferson  in  the  memorandum  is,  that  no 
proposition  of  any  kind  was  ever  made  to  him,  nor  any  answer 
authorized  by  him,  "  and  this  fact  General  Smith  affirms  to  me 
at  this  moment" 

In  accordance  with  this  assertion  of  Mr.  Jefferson  and  con- 
firmation of  General  Smith  is  the  passage  in  the  deposition  of 
General  Smith,  which  declares  "  that  he  knew  of  no  bargains  or 
agreements  which  took  place  at  the  time  of  the  ballotings,"  and 
the  other  passage,  which  states  "  that  he  [Mr.  Jefferson]  had 
told  me  [General  S.]  that  any  opinion  he  should  give  at  this 
time  might  be  attributed  to  improper  motives.  That  to  me 
[General  Smith]  he  had  no  hesitation  in  saying  that,  as  to  the 
public  debt,  &c,  &c,  he  had  not  changed  his  opinion,"  &c.  This 
was  so  far  from  authorizing  any  use  of  what  he  said,  that  might 
be  attributed  to  improper  motives,  that  it  was  expressed  as  be- 
tween themselves,  and  consequently  with  a  view  to  guard  against 
any  such  use. 

The  passage  in  the  deposition  of  General  Smith  on  which  par- 
ticular reliance  seems  to  be  placed,  as  contradicting  the  state- 
ment of  Mr.  Jefferson,  is  the  following: 

"  He  [Mr.  B.]  stated  that  he  had  it  in  his  power  (and  was  so 
disposed)  to  terminate  the  election,  but  he  wished  information  as 
to  Mr.  Jefferson's  opinions  on  certain  subjects,  and  mentioned  (I 
think)  the  same  three  points  already  alluded  to,  as  asked  by  Col. 
Parker  and  General  Dayton,  and  received  from  me  the  same  an- 
swer in  substance  (if  not  in  words)  that  I  had  given  to  General 
Dayton.  He  added  a  fourth,  to  wit:  what  would  be  Mr.  Jefferson's 
conduct  as  to  the  public  officers?  He  said  he  did  not  mean  con- 
fidential officers;  but,  by  way  of  elucidating  his  question,  he 
added,  such  as  Mr.  Latimer,  of  Philadelphia,  and  Mr.  McLane, 
of  Delaware.  I  answered  that  I  had  never  heard  Mr.  Jefferson 
say  any  thing  on  the  subject.  He  requested  that  I  would  en- 
quire and  inform  him  the  next  day.  I  did  so;  and  the  next  day 
(Saturday)  told  him,  that  Mr.  Jefferson  had  said  that  he  did  not 
think  such  officers  ought  to  be  dismissed  on  political  grounds 


156  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

only ,  except  in  cases  where  they  had  made  improper  use  of  their 
offices  to  force  the  officers  under  them  to  vote  contrary  to  their 
judgments.  That  as  to  Mr.  McLane,  he  had  already  been  spoken 
to  in  his  "behalf  by  Major  Eccleston;  and  from  the  character 
given  him  by  that  gentleman,  he  considered  him  a  meritorious 
officer;  of  course  that- he  would  not  be  displaced,  or  ought  not 
to  be  displaced.  I  further  added,  that  Mr.  Bayard  might  rest 
assured  (or  words  to  that  effect)  that  Mr.  Jefferson  would  con- 
duct, as  to  those  points,  agreeably  to  the  opinions  I  had  stated 
as  his.  Mr.  Bayard  then  said,  we  will  give  the  vote  on  Mon- 
day, and  we  separated." 

Here  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  General  Smith  does  not  say 
that  he  had  made  any  proposition  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  or  that  he 
should  communicate  to  Mr.  Bayard  the  conversation  then  held 
with  Mr.  Jefferson. 

The  expression  having  most  the  aspect  of  a  pledge  is,  "  he 
[Mr.  Jefferson]  considered  him  [Mr.  McLane]  a  meritorious 
officer;  of  course  that  he  would  not  be  displaced,  or  ought  not  to 
be  displaced,"  &c. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  phrase  admits  the  construction 
that  "  of  course,"  &c,  was  a  continuation  of  what  was  said  by 
Mr.  Jefferson,  not  the  inference  of  General  Smith.  But  to  con- 
strue the  expression  as  conveying  a  pledge  from  Mr.  Jefferson 
is  forbidden:  1.  By  the  declaration  of  General  Smith  in  the 
same  deposition,  that  he  [General  S.]  knew  of  no  bargains  or 
agreements  which  took  place  at  the  time  of  the  balloting.  2.  By 
the  caution  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  as  stated  by  General  Smith,  in  ex- 
pressing even  his  opinions  at  a  time  when  they  might  be  attrib- 
uted to  improper  motives.  3.  By  the  confirmation  given  by 
General  Smith  to  Mr.  Jefferson's  denial  of  the  fact  that  any 
proposition  of  any  kind  was  ever  made  to  him  on  any  occasion 
by  General  Smith,  or  any  answer  authorized  by  him,  [Mr.  Jef- 
ferson.] 

It  is  true  that  Mr.  Bayard,  as  already  observed,  must  have 
understood  General  Smith  in  this  conversation  as  meaning  that 
he  was  authorized  by  Mr.  Jefferson  to  say,  "  that  the  points  men- 
tioned [the  conditions  made  by  Mr.  B.]  corresponded  with  his 


1831.  LETTERS.  I57 

[Mr.  Jefferson's]  views  and  intentions."  But  whether  this  dis- 
crepancy is  to  be  explained  by  misapprehensions  at  the  time,  or 
by  the  lapse  of  nearly  five  years,  the  explanation  cannot  invali- 
date the  positive  denial  of  Mr.  Jefferson  that  any  such  author- 
ity was  given  to  General  Smith,  and  his  affirmance  of  the  denial 
at  the  moment  when  it  was  put  into  the  memorandum  by  Mr. 
Jefferson. 

It  can  never  be  admitted  that  the  authority  of  the  deliberate 
statement  of  Mr.  Jefferson  is  impaired  by  its  being  without  the 
sanction  of  an  oath.  Apart  from  its  intrinsic  sufficiency,  no  one 
can  doubt  that  such  a  sanction  would  readily  have  been  added 
on  any  occasion  calling  for  it;  and  with  the  greater  confidence, 
as  the  fact  sworn  to  would  have  been  reduced  to  writing  at  the 
time,  an  advantage  always  duly  estimated  in  cases  depending 
on  the  accuracy  of  recollection. 

The  situation  of  Mr.  Jefferson  during  the  critical  period  of 
the  Presidential  contest  in  the  House  of  Representatives  was 
equally  marked  by  its  peculiarity  and  its  importance.  He  saw 
the  whole  Government  in  a  state  of  convulsion;  he  saw  the  dan- 
ger of  an  absolute  interregnum  in  its  Executive  branch,  the  con- 
sequences of  which  could  not  be  foreseen;  he  saw  what  he  re- 
garded the  will  of  the  people  about  to  be  trampled  upon,  and 
the  party  whose  ascendency  he  believed  to  be  of  vital  import- 
ance to  the  cause  of  Republican  Government  attempted  to  be 
broken  down;  whilst  the  escape  from  all  these  dangers  presented 
to  him  was  through  pledges  which  might  be  stigmatized  as  an 
ambitious  intrigue  and  a  purchase  of  success  at  the  expense  of 
those  principles  and  feelings  which  he  avowed  and  held  invio- 
lable. Happily,  the  course  of  circumstances  fulfilled  his  patri- 
otic wishes  without  the  sacrifice  which  the  accomplishment  of 
them  had  seemed  to  require. 

The  situation  of  Mr.  Bayard  was  also  peculiar  and  trying. 
He  was  justly  struck  with  horror  at  the  prospect  of  an  inter- 
regnum in  the  Government,  so  full  of  evils  and  so  fatal  in  its 
example;  and  he  was  scarcely  less  alarmed  at  the  danger  which 
threatened,  what  he  held  to  be,  a  vital  policy  of  his  country. 
But  holding,  at  the  same  time,  in  his  hands  the  event  on  which 


^58  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

every  thing  depended,  he  availed  himself  of  the  opportunity  of 
terminating  the  crisis  in  a  manner  which  prevented  the  calamity 
he  most  dreaded,  and  provided,  as  he  believed,  an  adequate  se- 
curity against  the  other. 

Before  dismissing  the  subject,  a  word  may  be  proper  with  re- 
spect to  the  charge  in  the  publication  against  Mr.  Jefferson,  of 
leaving  the  memorandum  referring  to  Mr.  Bayard's  deposition 
for  posthumous  use,  when  the  means  of  refuting  it  might  be 
lost. 

The  suit  of  Gillespie  and  Smith,  which  led  to  the  deposition 
of  Mr.  Bayard,  is  said  to  have  been  a  fictitious  one,  instituted 
for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  and  perpetuating  testimony  against 
the  purity  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  conduct  during  the  Presidential 
election  in  1801.  The  cause,  it  is  understood,  never  was  brought 
to  trial;  and  it  is  inferred,  from  a  resort  to  the  source  which  fur- 
nished the  copies  of  the  depositions  of  Mr.  Bayard  and  General 
Smith,  that  the  depositions  were  never  published.  Of  their  ex- 
istence, however,  (and  in  a  custody  supposed  by  Mr.  Jefferson 
to  be  unfriendly,)  and  in  the  passage  in  that  of  Mr.  Bayard  tes- 
tifying that  he  (Mr.  Jefferson)  had  authorized  General  Smith 
to  accede  for  him  to  certain  conditions  on  which  his  election  to 
the  Presidency  might  be  obtained,  Mr.  Jefferson,  it  seems,  was 
apprized  from  some  friendly  quarter.  With  this  knowledge  of 
a  shaft  that  might  posthumously  inflict  a  deep  wound  on  his 
reputation,  could  he  do  less  than  provide  a  shield  against  it  by 
recording  with  his  own  hand  the  falsity  of  the  charge,  and  the 
affirmance  of  its  falsity  at  the  moment  of  his  doing  so,  by  the 
individual  named  as  the  authority  for  the  charge?  What  is  now 
before  the  public  proves  that  a  weapon  was  in  reserve  by  which 
a  posthumous  assault  on  his  reputation  might  be  made;  and  if 
there  be  unfairness  in  the  case  let  candor  pronounce  on  which 
side  it  is  chargeable— on  that  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  not  of  the  depo- 
nents, (doubtless  involuntary,)  but  of  the  parties  to  the  suit 
which  rendered  the  precaution  necessary. 


1831.  LETTERS.  159 


TO    ROBERT   WALSH. 

Dear  Sir, — The  publication  which  gave  rise  to  the  inclosed 
observations  having  first  appeared  in  the  National  Gazette,  I 
ask  the  favor  of  you  to  allow  them  the  advantage  of  issuing 
from  the  same  source  and  of  circulating  through  the  same  chan- 
nel. I  have  thought  it  best  to  leave  them  without  a  name,  that 
no  feelings  of  any  sort  towards  the  writer  may  mingle  them- 
selves with  the  impressions  made  on  the  reader. 

I  take  the  occasion,  sir,  to  renew  to  you  the  assurances  of  my 
high  esteem,  with  an  offer  of  my  cordial  salutations. 


TO   MR.   WALSH. 

Jan*  31.  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  just  discover  that  in  the  paper  inclosed  this 
morning  for  the  National  Gazette,  a  correction  was  not  made, 
which,  I  presume,  this  will  be  in  time  to  have  supplied.  I  ask 
the  favor,  then,  that  in  the  4th  paragraph  from  the  end  the  words 
"  and  he  saw,  at  the  same  time,  no  escape  from  all  these  dangers, 
but,"  be  erased,  and  "  whilst  the  escape  from  these  dangers,  pre- 
sented to  him,  was,"  be  inserted. 


TO  WILLIAM   H.   HARRISON. 

Montpellieb,  Feb?  1,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  22d  ult°,  in 
which  you  request  my  opinion  of  the  character  and  merits  of 
General  Pike. 

Having  had  but  a  very  slight  personal  acquaintance  with 
him,  I  cannot  say  more  of  his  private  character  than  that  every- 
thing I  recollect  to  have  heard  of  it  was  favorable  to  it. 

Of  his  enterprising  spirit,  his  distinguished  gallantry,  and 
his  zealous  services  in  his  military  career,  there  must,  I  pre- 
sume, be  sufficient  evidence  in  public  preservation.     All  the  im- 


160  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

pressions  I  retain  coincide  with  it;  and  I  may  add,  that  I  al- 
ways understood  that  lie  united  with  his  military  merits  an  ex- 
emplary devotion  to  the  rights  of  his  country,  and  to  the  free 
principles  of  its  institutions. 

The  universal  sensation  known  to  have  been  produced  by 
his  fall  in  the  final  display  of  his  heroic  courage,  bore  a  signal 
testimony  to  the  rank  he  held  in  the  estimation  and  the  hearts 
of  his  fellow-citizens. 

An  earlier  answer  to  your  letter  has  been  prevented  by  an 
indisposition,  from  which  my  recovery  is  far  from  being  com- 
plete. 


TO    C.    J.    INGERSOLL. 

Montpellieb,  February  2,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  January  21,  ask- 
ing— 

1.  Is  there  any  State  power  to  make  Banks? 

2.  Is  the  Federal  power,  as  it  has  been  exercised,  or  as  pro- 
posed to  be  exercised  by  President  Jackson,  preferable? 

The  evil  which  produced  the  prohibitory  clause  in  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  was  the  practice  of  the  States  in 
making  bills  of  credit,  and  in  some  instances  appraised  property, 
"a  legal  tender."  If  the  notes  of  the  State  Banks,  therefore, 
whether  chartered  or  unchartered,  be  made  a  legal  tender,  they 
are  prohibited;  if  not  made  a  legal  tender,  they  do  not  fall 
within  the  prohibitory  clause.  The  N°  of  the  Federalist  re- 
ferred to  was  written  with  that  view  of  the  subject;  and  this, 
witli  probably  other  contemporary  expositions,  and  the  uninter- 
rupted practice  of  the  States  in  creating  and  permitting  Banks, 
without  making  their  notes  a  legal  tender,  would  seem  to  be  a 
bar  to  the  question  if  it  were  not  inexpedient  now  to  agitate  it. 

A  virtual  and  incidental  enforcement  of  the  depreciated  notes 
of  the  State  Banks,  by  their  crowding  out  a  sound  medium, 
though  a  great  evil,  was  not  foreseen;  and  if  it  had  been  appre- 
hended, it  is  questionable  whether  the  Constitution  of  the  Uni- 


1831.  LETTERS.  1G1 

ted  States,  which  had  so  many  obstacles  to  encounter,  would 
have  ventured  to  guard  against  it  by  an  additional  obstacle.  A 
virtual,  and,  it  is  hoped,  an  adequate  remedy  may  hereafter  be 
found  in  the  refusal  of  State  paper,  when  debased,  in  any  of  the 
Federal  transactions,  and  in  the  control  of  the  Federal  Bank, 
this  being  itself  controled  from  suspending  its  specie  payments 
by  the  public  authority. 

On  the  other  question  I  readily  decide  against  the  project 
recommended  by  the  President.  Reasons,  more  than  sufficient, 
appear  to  have  been  presented  to  the  public  in  the  reviews  and 
other  comments  which  it  has  called  forth.  How  far  a  hint  for 
it  may  have  been  taken  from  Mr.  Jefferson  I  know  not.  The 
kindred  ideas  of  the  latter  may  be  seen  in  his  Memoirs,  &c,  vol. 
iv,  p.  196,  207,  526,  and  his  view  of  the  State  Banks,  vol.  iv,  p. 
199  and  220. 

There  are  sundry  statutes  of  Virginia  prohibiting  the  circu- 
lation of  notes  payable  to  bearer,  whether  issued  by  individuals 
or  unchartered  banks. 

These  observations,  little  new  or  important  as  they  may  be, 
would  have  been  more  promptly  furnished,  but  for  an  indispo- 
sition in  which  your  letter  found  me,  and  which  has  not  yet  en- 
tirely left  me.  I  hope  this  will  find  you  in  good  health,  and 
you  have  my  best  wishes  for  its  continuance  and  the  addition 
of  every  other  blessing. 


TO   THEODORE    SEDGWICK,   JUNR. 

Montpellier,  Feb"  12,  1831. 

Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  January  27,  which  was 
retarded  a  few  days,  by  going  in  the  first  instance  to  Richmond. 

You  ask  "  whether  Mr.  Livingston  (formerly  Governor  of  N. 
Jersey)  took  an  active  part  in  the  debates,  (of  the  Federal  Con- 
vention in  1787,)  and  whether  he  was  considered  as  having  a 
leaning  towards  the  Federal  party  and  principles?"  adding, 

vol.  iv.  11 


1G2  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

"  that  you  will  be  obliged  by  any  further  information  it  may  be 
in  my  power  to  give  you." 

Mr.  Livingston  did  not  take  his  seat  in  the  Convention  till 
some  progress  had  been  made  in  the  task  committed  to  it;  and 
he  did  not  take  an  active  part  in  its  debates;  but  he  was  placed 
on  important  committees,  where  it  may  be  presumed  he  had  an 
agency  and  a  due  influence.  He  was  personally  unknown  to 
many,  perhaps  most  of  the  members;  but  there  was  a  predispo- 
sition in  all  to  manifest  the  respect  due  to  the  celebrity  of  his 
name. 

I  am  at  a  loss  for  a  precise  answer  to  the  question  whether 
he  had  a  leaning  to  the  Federal  party  and  principles.  Pre- 
suming that,  by  the  party  alluded  to,  is  meant  those  in  the  Con- 
vention who  favored  a  more  enlarged,  in  contradistinction  to 
those  who  favored  a  more  restricted  grant  of  powers  to  the 
Federal  Government,  I  can  only  refer  to  the  recorded  votes 
which  are  now  before  the  public;  and  these  being  by  States,  not 
by  heads,  individual  opinions  are  not  disclosed  by  them.  The 
votes  of  N.  Jersey  corresponded  generally  with  the  plan  offered 
by  Mr.  Patterson;  but  the  main  object  of  that  being  to  secure 
to  the  smaller  States  an  equality  with  the  larger  in  the  struct- 
ure of  the  Government  in  opposition  to  the  outline  previously 
introduced,  which  had  reversed  the  object,  it  is  difficult  to  say 
what  was  the  degree  of  power  to  which  there  might  be  an  ab- 
stract leaning.  The  two  subjects,  the  structure  of  the  Govern- 
ment and  the  quantum  of  power  entrusted  to  it,  were  more  or 
less  inseparable  in  the  minds  of  all,  as  depending,  a  good  deal, 
the  one  on  the  other.  After  the  compromise,  which  gave  the 
small  States  an  equality  in  one  branch  of  the  Legislature,  and 
the  large  States  an  inequality  in  the  other  branch,  the  abstract 
leaning  of  opinions  would  better  appear.  With  those,  however, 
who  did  not  enter  into  debate,  and  whose  votes  could  not  be 
distinguished  from  those  of  their  State  colleagues,  their  opinions 
could  only  be  known  among  themselves  or  to  their  particular 
friends. 

I  know  Dot,  sir,  that  I  can  give  you  any  of  the  further  infor- 


1831.  LETTERS.  1(J3 

mation  you  wish  that  is  not  attainable  with  more  authenticity 
and  particularity  from  other  sources.  My  acquaintance  with 
Governor  Livingston  was  limited  to  an  exchange  of  the  com- 
mon civilities,  and  these  to  the  period  of  the  Convention.  In 
my  youth  I  passed  several  years  in  the  College  of  N.  Jersey,  of 
which  he  was  a  trustee,  and  where  his  two  sons,  William  and 
the  late  member  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  U.  States,  were 
fellow-students.  I  recollect  to  have  seen  him  there  in  his  ca- 
pacity of  trustee,  and  to  have  heard  him  always  spoken  of  as 
among  the  distinguished  lawyers,  and  as  conspicuous  among  the 
literary  patriots  of  N.  Jersey.  I  recollect,  particularly,  that  he 
was  understood  to  be  one  of  the  authors  of  a  work  entitled 
"  The  Independent  Reflector,"  and  that  some  of  the  papers  in  it 
ascribed  to  him,  being  admired  for  the  energy  and  eloquence  of 
their  composition,  furnished  occasionally  to  the  students  ora- 
tions for  the  rostrum,  which  were  alternately  borrowed  from 
books  and  composed  by  themselves. 

I  regret,  sir,  that  I  have  not  been  able  to  make  a  more  im- 
portant contribution  for  the  biographical  memoir  you  meditate. 
Wishing  you  all  the  success  in  other  researches  which  the  ob- 
ject of  them  merits,  I  tender  you  my  respectful  and  friendly  sal- 
utations. 


TO    EOBERT   WALSH, 

Feb*  15,  1831. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  yours  of  the  10  th  instant.  The 
posture  of  Mr.  Jefferson  in  1801  was  singularly  delicate,  and  I 
thought  the  varied  expression  better  fitted  it  than  the  text  as 
it  stood.  I  acquiesce,  however,  in  your  view  of  the  case,  the 
rather,  as  it  avoids  the  awkwardness  of  a  retrospective  correc- 
tion. 

I  should  not  certainly,  under  any  circumstances,  distrust  your 
observance  of  the  rule  of  confidence.  It  will  not  be  strange  if 
conjectures  as  to  the  authorship  of  the  vindication  of  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson should,  among  others,  light  on  me;  though  less  for  the 


jg4  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

reason  you  mention,  than  from  motives  to  such  an  undertaking 
that  might  be  thought  appropriate  to  me. 

In  noticing  your  friendly  offer  of  the  National  Gazette  for  any 
use  I  may  have  for  it,  I  feel  it  not  improper  to  express  my  re- 
spect for  the  distinguished  ability  and  the  attractions  by 
which  it  is  characterized.  The  occasions  on  which  I  have  yielded 
to  .calls  on  my  pen  have  been  rare,  perhaps  not  enough  so;  and 
the  channels  for  publication  have  been  determined  by  the  occa- 
sions themselves.  I  ought  to  hope  that  these  have  ceased,  rec- 
ollecting, as  I  do,  that  after  the  canonical  age  of  three-score-and- 
ten,  (and  a  few  weeks  will  add  another  decade  to  mine,)  a  writer 
will  find  his  arguments,  whatever  they  be,  answered  with  an 
"  I  wonder  how  old  he  is  ?  " 

I  congratulate  you,  sir,  that  it  will  be  so  long  before  you  can 
receive  such  an  answer,  however  convenient  the  refuge  might 
be  to  the  opponent. 


TO    C.    E.    HAYNES. 

Montpellter,  Feb.  25,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  the  copy  of  Judge  Clayton's  Re- 
view of  the  "  Report  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means," 
for  which  the  envelope  informs  me  that  I  am  indebted  to  your 
politeness. 

A  perusal  of  the  review  has  left  an  impression  highly  favour- 
able to  the  talents  of  the  author  and  to  the  accomplishments  of 
his  pen.  But  I  cannot  concur  in  his  views  and  reasonings  on 
some  of  the  material  points  in  discussion;  and  I  must  be  per- 
mitted to  think  he  has  done  injustice  in  the  remark,  "  that  I 
seem  to  have  surrendered  all  my  early  opinions  at  discretion." 

I  am  far  from  regarding  a  change  of  opinions,  under  the  lights 
of  experience  and  the  results  of  improved  reflection,  as  exposed 
to  censure;  and  still  farther  from  the  vanity  of  supposing  myself 
less  in  need  of  that  privilege  than  others.  But  I  had  indulged 
the  belief  that  there  were  few,  if  any,  of  my  contemporaries, 
through  the  long  period  and  varied  scenes  of  my  political  life, 


1831.  LETTERS.  165 

to  whom  a  mutability  of  opinion  was  less  applicable,  on  the 
great  constitutional  questions  which  have  agitated  the  public 
mind. 

The  case  to  which  the  Judge  more  especially  referred  was, 
doubtless,  that  of  the  Bank,  which  I  had  originally  opposed  as 
unauthorized  by  the  Constitution,  and  to  which  I  at  length  gave 
my  official  assent.  But  even  here  the  inconsistency  is  apparent 
only,  not  real;  inasmuch  as  my  abstract  opinion  of  the  text  of 
the  Constitution  is  not  changed,  and  the  assent  was  given  in 
pursuance  of  my  early  and  unchanged  opinion,  that,  in  the  case  of 
a  Constitution  as  of  a  law,  a  course  of  authoritative  expositions 
sufficiently  deliberate,  uniform,  and  settled,  was  an  evidence  of 
the  public  will  necessarily  overruling  individual  opinions.  It 
cannot  be  less  necessary  that  the  meaning  of  a  Constitution 
should  be  freed  from  uncertainty,  than  that  the  law  should  be 
so.  That  cases  may  occur  which  transcend  all  authority  of 
precedents  must  be  admitted,  but  they  form  exceptions  which 
will  speak  for  themselves  and  must  justify  themselves. 

I  do  not  forget  that  the  chain  of  sanctions  to  the  bank  power 
has  been  considered  as  broken  by  a  veto  of  Vice  President  Clin- 
ton to  a  bill  establishing  a  bank.  But  it  is  believed  to  be  quite 
certain,  that  the  equality  of  votes  which  referred  the  question 
to  his  casting  vote  was  occasioned  by  a  union  of  some,  who  dis- 
approved the  plan  of  the  bank  only,  with  those  who  denied  its 
constitutionality;  and  that,  on  a  naked  question  of  constitution- 
ality, a  majority  of  the  Senate  would  have  added  another  sanc- 
tion, as  at  a  later  period  was  done,  to  the  validity  of  such  an 
institution. 

If  this  explanation  should  be  found  obtrusive,  I  hope  you  will 
recollect  that  you  have  been  accessory  to  it,  and  that  it  will  not 
prevent  an  acceptance  of  the  respectful  salutations  which  are 
cordially  offered. 


10G  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

TO   JAMES   ROBERTSON. 

March  27,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  8th,  but  it  was 
not  until  the  23d  instant. 

The  veil  which  was  originally  over  the  draught  of  the  resolu- 
tions offered  in  1798  to  the  Virginia  Assembly  having  been  long 
since  removed,  I  may  say,  in  answer  to  your  inquiries,  that  it 
was  penned  by  me;  and  that,  as  it  went  from  inc,  the  third  reso- 
lution contained  the  word  "  alone,"  which  was  struck  out  by  the 
House  of  Delegates.  Why  the  alteration  was  made,  I  have  no 
particular  knowledge,  not  being  a  member  at  the  time.  I  al- 
ways viewed  it  as  an  error.  The  term  was  meant  to  confine 
the  meaning  of  "parties  to  the  constitutional  compact"  to  the 
States  in  the  capacity  in  which  they  formed  the  compact,  in  ex- 
clusion of  the  State  governments  which  did  not  form  it.  And 
the  use  of  the  term  "  States  "  throughout  in  the  plural  number 
distinguished  between  the  rights  belonging  to  them  in  their 
collective,  from  those  belonging  to  them  in  their  individual  ca- 
pacities. 

With  respect  to  the  terms  following  the  term  "unconstitu- 
tional," viz.,  "not  law,  but  null,  void,  and  of  no  force  or  effect," 
which  were  stricken  out  of  the  seventh  resolution,  my  memory 
cannot  positively  decide  whether  they  were  or  were  not  in  the 
original  draught,  and  no  copy  of  it  appears  to  have  been  re- 
tained. On  the  presumption  that  they  were  in  the  draught  as 
it  went  from  me,  I  am  confident  that  they  must  have  been  re- 
garded only  as  giving  accumulated  emphasis  to  the  declaration, 
that  the  alien  and  sedition  acts  had,  in  the  opinion  of  the  As- 
sembly, violated  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  not 
that  the  addition  of  them  could  annul  the  acts  or  sanction  a  re- 
sistance of  them.  The  resolution  was  expressly  declaratory, 
and,  proceeding  from  the  Legislature  only,  which  was  not  even 
a  party  to  the  Constitution,  could  be  declaratory  of  opinion 
only. 

It  may  not  be  out  of  place  here  to  remark,  that  if  the  inser- 
tion of  those  terms  in  the  draught  could  have  the  effect  of  ehow- 


1831.  LETTERS.  167 

ing  an  inconsistency  in  its  author,  the  striking  them  out  would 
be  a  protest  against  the  doctrine  which  has  claimed  the  author- 
ity of  Virginia  in  its  support. 

If  the  third  resolution  he  in  any  degree  open  to  misconstruc- 
tion on  this  point,  the  language  and  scope  of  the  seventh  ought 
to  control  it;  and  if  a  more  explicit  guard  against  misconstruc- 
tion was  not  provided,  it  is  explained  in  this,  as  in  other  cases 
of  omission,  by  the  entire  absence  of  apprehension  that  it  could 
be  necessary.  •  Who  could,  at  that  day,  have  foreseen  some  of 
the  comments  on  the  Constitution  advanced  at  the  present? 

The  task  you  have  in  hand  is  an  interesting  one,  the  more  so 
as  there  is  certainly  room  for  a  more  precise  and  regular  his- 
tory of  the  Articles  of  Confederation  and  of  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  than  has  yet  appeared.  I  am  not  ac- 
quainted with  Pitkin's  work,  and  it  was  not  within  the  scope 
of  Marshall's  Life  of  Washington  to  introduce  more  of  consti- 
tutional history  than  was  involved  in  his  main  subject.  The 
journals  of  the  State  Legislatures,  with  the  journal  and  debates 
of  the  State  Conventions,  and  the  journal  and  other  printed  ac- 
counts of  the  proceedings  of  the  Federal  Convention  of  1787, 
are,  of  course,  the  primary  sources  of  information.  Some 
sketches  of  what  passed  in  that  Convention  have  found  their 
way  to  the  public,  particularly  those  of  Judge  Yates  and  of  Mr. 
Luther  Martin.  But  the  Judge,  though  a  highly  respectable 
man,  was  a  zealous  partisan,  and  has  committed  gross  errors  in 
his  desultory  notes.  He  left  the  Convention  also  before  it  had 
reached  the  stages  of  its  deliberations  in  which  the  character 
of  the  body  and  the  views  of  individuals  were  sufficiently  devel- 
oped. Mr.  Martin,  who  was  also  present  but  a  part  of  the  time, 
betrays,  in  his  communication  to  the  Legislature  of  Maryland, 
feelings  which  had  a  discolouring  effect  on  his  statements.  As 
it  has  become  known  that  I  was  at  much  pains  to  preserve  an 
account  of  what  passed  in  the  Convention,  I  ought  perhaps  to 
observe,  that  I  have  thought  it  becoming,  in  several  views,  that 
a  publication  of  it  should  be  at  least  of  a  posthumous  date. 

I  know  not  that  I  could  refer  you  to  any  other  appropriate 
sources  of  information  which  will  not  have  occurred  to  you,  or 


IQg  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

not  fall  within  your  obvious  researches.  The  period  which 
yovr  plan  embraces  abounds  with  materials  in  pamphlets  and 
in  newspaper  essays  not  published  in  that  form.  You  would, 
doubtless,  find  it  worth  while  to  turn  your  attention  to  the  col- 
lections of  the  historical  societies  now  in  print  in  some  of  the 
States.  The  library  of  Philadelphia  is  probably  rich  in  perti- 
nent materials.  Its  catalogue  alone  might  point  to  such  as  are 
otherwise  attainable.  Although  I  might,  with  little  risk,  leave 
it  to  your  own  inference,  I  take  the  liberty  of  noting  that  this 
hasty  compliance  with  your  request  is  not  for  the  public  eye; 
adding  only  my  sincere  wishes  for  the  success  of  the  undertaking 
which  led  to  it,  and  the  offer  of  my  friendly  respects  and  salu- 
tations. 


TO   JARED   SPARKS. 

MoNTPELLIKR,  April  8,  1831. 

Dear  Sir,— I  have  duly  received  your  letter  of  March  30.  In 
answer  to  your  enquiries  "  respecting  the  part  acted  by  Gouv- 
erneur  Morris  (whose  life,  you  observe,  you  are  writing)  in  the 
Federal  Convention  of  1787,  and  the  political  doctrines  main- 
tained by  him,"  it  may  be  justly  said  that  he  was  an  able,  an 
eloquent,  and  an  active  member,  and  shared  largely  in  the  dis- 
cussions succeeding  the  1st  of  July,  previous  to  which,  with  the 
exception  of  a  few  of  the  early  days,  he  was  absent. 

Whether  he  accorded  precisely  "  with  the  political  doctrines 
of  Hamilton  "  I  cannot  say.  He  certainly  did  not  "  incline  to 
the  Democratic  side,"  and  was  very  frank  in  avowing  his  opin- 
ions when  most  at  variance  with  those  prevailing  in  the  Con- 
vention. He  did  not  propose  any  outline  of  a  Constitution,  as 
was  done  by  Hamilton;  but  he  contended  for  certain  articles, 
(a  Senate  for  life,  particularly,)  which  he  held  essential  to  the 
stability  and  energy  of  a  Government  capable  of  protecting  the 
rights  of  property  against  the  spirit  of  Democracy.  He  wished 
to  make  the  weight  of  wealth  to  balance  that  of  numbers,  which 


1831.  LETTERS.  169 

he  pronounced  to  be  the  only  effectual  security  to  each  agains* 
the  encroachments  of  the  other. 

The  finish  given  to  the  style  and  arrangement  of  the  Consti- 
tution fairly  belongs  to  the  pen  of  Mr.  Morris;  the  task  having 
been  probably  handed  over  to  him  by  the  Chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee, himself  a  highly  respectable  member,  with  the  ready 
concurrence  of  the  others.  A  better  choice  could  not  have  been 
made,  as  the  performance  of  the  task  proved.  It  is  true  that 
the  state  of  the  materials,  consisting  of  a  reported  draught  in 
detail,  and  subsequent  resolutions  accurately  penned,  and  fall- 
ing easily  in  their  proper  places,  was  a  good  preparation  for  the 
symmetry  and  phraseology  of  the  instrument;  but  there  was  suffi- 
cient room  for  the  talents  and  taste  stamped  by  the  author  on 
the  face  of  it.  The  alterations  made  by  the  Committee  are  not 
recollected.  They  were  not  such  as  to  impair  the  merit  of  the 
composition.  Those,  verbal  and  others,  made  in  the  Convention, 
may  be  gathered  from  the  Journal,  and  will  be  found  also  [to 
leave]  that  merit  altogether  unimpaired. 

The  anecdote  you  mention  may  not  be  without  a  foundation, 
but  not  in  the  extent  supposed.  It  is  certain  that  the  return  of 
Mr.  Morris  to  the  Convention  was  at  a  critical  stage  of  its  pro- 
ceedings. The  knot  felt  as  the  Gordian  one  was  the  question 
between  the  larger  and  smaller  States  on  the  rule  of  voting  in 
the  Senatorial  branch  of  the  Legislature;  the  latter  claiming, 
the  former  opposing,  the  rule  of  equality.  Great  zeal  and  per- 
tinacity had  been  shewn  on  both  sides;  and  an  equal  division  of 
the  votes  on  the  question  had  been  reiterated  and  prolonged  till 
it  had  become  not  only  distressing  but  seriously  alarming.  It 
was  during  that  period  of  gloom  that  Dr  Franklin  made  the 
proposition  for  a  religious  service  in  the  Convention,  an  account 
of  which  was  so  erroneously  given,  with  every  semblance  of  au- 
thenticity, through  the  National  Intelligencer,  several  years  ago. 
The  crisis  was  not  over  when  Mr.  Morris  is  said  to  have  had  an 
interview  and  conversation  with  General  Washington  and  Mr. 
R.  Morris,  such  as  may  well  have  occurred;  but  it  appears  that 
on  the  day  of  his  re-entering  the  Convention  a  proposition  had 
been  made  from  another  quarter  to  refer  the  knotty  question  to 


170  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

a  committee  with  a  view  to  some  compromise;  the  indications 
being  manifest  that  sundry  members  from  the  larger  States  were 
relaxing  in  their  opposition,  and  that  some  ground  of  compro- 
mise was  contemplated,  such  as  finally  took  place,  and  as  may 
be  seen  in  the  printed  Journal.  Mr.  Morris  was  in  the  deputa- 
tion from  the  large  State  of  Pennsylvania,  and  combated  the 
compromise  throughout.  The  tradition  is,  however,  correct  that 
on  the  day  of  his  resuming  his  seat  he  entered  with  anxious  feel- 
ings into  the  debate,  and  in  one  of  his  speeches  painted  the  con- 
sequences of  an  abortive  result  to  the  Convention  in  all  the  deep 
colours  suited  to  the  occasion.  But  it  is  not  believed  that  any 
material  influence  on  the  turn  which  things  took  could  be  as- 
cribed to  his  efforts;  for,  besides  the  mingling  with  them  some 
of  his  most  disrelished  ideas,  the  topics  of  his  eloquent  appeals 
to  the  members  had  been  exhausted  during  his  absence,  and 
their  minds  were  too  much  made  up  to  be  susceptible  of  new  im- 
pressions. 

It  is  but  due  to  Mr.  Morris  to  remark,  that  to  the  brilliancy 
and  fertility  of  his  genius  he  added,  what  is  too  rare,  a  candid 
surrender  of  his  opinions  when  the  lights  of  discussion  satisfied 
him  that  they  had  been  too  hastily  formed,  and  a  readiness  to 
aid  in  making  the  best  of  measures  in  which  he  had  been  over- 
ruled. 

In  making  this  hastened  communication,  I  have  more  confi- 
dence in  the  discretion  with  which  it  will  be  used,  than  in  its 
fulfilment  of  your  anticipations.  I  hope  it  will  at  least  be  ac- 
cepted as  a  proof  of  my  respect  for  your  object,  and  of  the  sin- 
cerity with  which  I  tender  you  a  reassurance  of  the  cordial  es- 
teem and  good  wishes  in  which  Mrs.  Madison  always  joins  me. 

I  take  for  granted  you  have  at  command  all  the  printed  works 
of  Mr.  Morris.  I  recollect  that  there  can  be  found  among  my 
pamphlets  a  small  one  by  him,  intended  to  prevent  the  threat- 
ened repeal  of  the  law  of  Pennsylvania  which  had  been  passed 
as  necessary  to  support  the  Bank  of  N.  America,  and  when  the 
repeal  was  viewed  as  a  formidable  blow  to  the  establishment. 
Should  a  copy  be  needed,  I  will  hunt  it  up  and  forward  it. 


1831.  LETTERS.  171 


TO   JAMES   ROBERTSON. 

Montpelliee,  April  20,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  3d  instant,  post-marked  the 
5th,  was  not  received  till  the  day  before  yesterday,  the  18th.  I 
know  not  that  I  can  say  anything  on  the  constitutional  points 
stated,  which  has  not  been  substantially  said  in  publications 
into  which  I  have  been  heretofore  led.  In  general,  I  adhere  to 
the  remark,  that  the  proper  way  to  understand  our  novel  and 
complex  system  of  government  is  to  avoid,  as  much  as  may  be, 
the  use  of  technical  terms  and  phrases  appropriate  to  other  forms, 
and  to  examine  the  process  of  its  formation,  the  peculiarity  of 
its  structure,  and  the  limitation  and  distribution  of  its  powers. 
Much  of  the  constitutional  controversy  which  has  prevailed  has 
turned,  as  often  happens,  on  the  different  ideas  attached  to  the 
language  employed,  and  would  have  been  obviated  by  previous 
definitions  of  its  terms.  That  the  people  of  the  United  States 
formed  the  Constitution,  will  be  denied  or  affirmed  according 
to  the  sense  in  which  the  expression  is  understood.  The  main 
question  is,  whether  they  have  not  given  to  the  charter  a  sanc- 
tion in  a  capacity  and  a  mode  that  shuts  the  door  against  all 
such  disuniting  and  nullifying  doctrines  as  those  lately  ad- 
vanced. 

If  the  authority  to  admit  new  States  be  sufficiently  conveyed 
by  the  text  of  the  Constitution,  there  would  seem  to  be  not 
more  difficulty  in  the  principle  of  the  case  than  in  that  of  natu- 
ralizing an  alien,  at  least  where  the  territory  of  the  admitted 
State  made  a  part  of  the  original  domain.  In  the  case  of  an 
acquired  territory,  with  its  inhabitants,  as  in  that  of  Louisiana, 
the  questions  belonging  to  it  are  questions  of  construction,  turn- 
ing on  the  constitutional  authority  to  acquire,  and  to  admit 
when  acquired.  You  are  no  doubt  aware  that  such  questions 
were  actually  raised  on  that  occasion. 

With  respect  to  the  words  "  general  welfare,"  I  have  always 
regarded  them  as  qualified  by  the  detail  of  powers  connected 
with  them.  To  take  them  in  a  literal  and  unlimited  sense 
would  be  a  metamorphosis  of  the  Constitution  into  a  character 


172  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

■which  there  is  a  host  of  proofs  was  not  contemplated  by  its  crea- 
tors. If  the  words  obtained  so  readily  a  place  in  the  "  Articles 
of  Confederation,"  and  received  so  little  notice  in  their  admis- 
sion into  the  present  Constitution,  and  retained  for  so  long  a 
time  a  silent  place  in  both,  the  fairest  explanation  is,  that  the 
words,  in  the  alternative  of  meaning  nothing  or  meaning  every- 
thing, had  the  former  meaning  taken  for  granted. 

I  have  availed  myself,  sir,  of  your  permission  to  give  a  brief 
answer  to  your  letter,  and  the  rather  as  the  interval  between 
its  receipt  and  your  intended  departure  for  the  West  did  not 
well  admit  of  a  long  one.  Nor,  indeed,  with  more  time,  could 
I  have  added  much  to  it  that  would  not  have  been  superfluous 
to  you,  as  well  as  inconvenient  at  the  octogenary  age  of  which 
I  am  reminded  whenever  I  take  up  my  pen  on  such  subjects. 

With  friendly  salutations, 


FOR   MR.    PAULDING. 

Much  curiosity  and  some  comment  have  been  exerted  by  the 
marvellous  identities  in  a  plan  of  Government  proposed  by 
Charles  Pinckney  in  the  Convention  of  1787,  as  published  in  the 
Journals  with  the  text  of  the  Constitution,  as  finally  agreed  to. 
I  find  among  my  pamphlets  a  copy  of  a  small  one  entitled  "  Ob- 
servations on  the  Plan  of  Government  submitted  to  the  Federal 
Convention,  in  Philadelphia,  on  the  28th  of  May,  by  Mr.  C. 
Pinckney,  a  Delegate  from  S.  Carolina,  delivered  at  different 
times  in  the  Convention." 

The  copy  is  so  defaced  and  mutilated  that  it  is  impossible  to 
make  out  enough  of  the  plan,  as  referred  to  in  the  Observations, 
for  a  due  comparison  of  it  with  that  printed  in  the  Journal. 
The  pamphlet  was  printed  in  N.  York  by  Francis  Childs.  The 
year  is  effaced.  It  must  have  been  not  very  long  after  the  close 
of  the  Convention,  and  with  the  sanction,  at  least,  of  Mr.  Pinck- 
ney himself.  It  has  occurred  that  a  copy  may  be  attainable  at 
the  printing  office,  if  still  kept  up,  or  examine  in  some  of  the 


1831.  LETTERS.  173 

libraries  or  historical  collections  in  the  city.  Wlicn  you  can 
snatch  a  moment,  in  your  walks  with  other  views,  for  a  call  at 
such  places,  you  will  promote  an  object  of  some  little  interest 
as  well  as  delicacy,  by  ascertaining  whether  the  article  in  ques- 
tion can  be  met  with.  I  have  among  my  manuscript  papers 
lights  on  the  subject.  The  pamphlet  of  Mr.  P.  could  not  fail  to 
add  to  them. 
April,  1831. 


TO   J.   K.   PAULDING. 

MONTPELLIER,  Ap1 ,   1831. 

Dear  Sir, — T  have  received  your  letter  of  the  6th  instant, 
and  feel  myself  very  safe  in  joining  your  other  friends  in  their 
advice  on  the  Biographical  undertaking  you  meditate.  The 
plan  you  adopt  is  a  valuable  improvement  on  the  prevailing  ex- 
amples, which  have  too  much  usurped  the  functions  of  the  histo- 
rian; and  by  omitting  the  private  features  of  character,  and 
anecdotes,  which,  as  condiments,  always  add  flavour  and  some- 
times nutrition  to  the  repast,  have  forfeited  much  of  the  due  at- 
traction. The  more  historical  mode  has  been  recommended, 
probably,  by  the  more  ready  command  of  materials,  such  as 
abound  in  the  contributions  of  the  press,  and  in  the  public  ar- 
chives. In  a  task  properly  biographical,  the  difficulty  lies  in 
the  evanescent  or  inaccessible  information  which  it  particularly 
requires.  Autographic  memorials  are  rare,  and  usually  deficient 
on  essential  points,  if  not  otherwise  faulty;  and  at  the  late  pe- 
riods of  life  the  most  knowing  witnesses  may  have  descended 
to  the  tomb,  or  their  memories  become  no  longer  faithful  deposi- 
tories. Where  oral  tradition  is  the  resort,  all  know  the  uncer- 
tainties and  inaccuracies  which  beset  it. 

I  ought  certainly  to  be  flattered  by  finding  my  name  on  the 
list  of  subjects  you  have  selected;  and  particularly  so,  as  I  can 
say  with  perfect  sincerity,  there  is  no  one  to  whose  justice, 
judgment,  and  every  other  requisite,  I  could  more  willingly 


174  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

confide,  whatever  of  posthumous  pretension  my  career  through 
an  eventful  period  may  have  to  a  conservative  notice.  Yet  I 
feel  the  awkwardness  of  attempting  "  a  sketch  of  the  principal 
incidents  of  my  life,"  such  as  the  partiality  of  your  friendship 
has  prompted  you  to  request.  Towards  a  compliance  with  your 
object  I  may  avail  myself  of  a  paper,  though  too  meagre  even  for 
the  name  of  a  sketch,  which  was  very  reluctantly  but  unavoidably 
drawn  up  a  few  years  ago  for  an  abortive  biography.  Whether 
I  shall  be  able  to  give  it  any  amplification,  is  too  uncertain  to 
admit  a  promise.  My  life  has  been  so  much  of  a  public  one, 
that  any  review  of  it  must  mainly  consist  of  the  agency  which 
was  my  lot  in  public  transactions;  and  of  that  agency  the  por- 
tions probably  the  most  acceptable  to  general  curiosity  are  to 
be  found  in  my  manuscript  preservations  of  some  of  those  trans- 
actions, and  in  the  epistolary  communications  to  confidential 
friends  made  at  the  time,  and  on  the  spot,  whilst  I  was  a  mem- 
ber of  political  bodies,  general  or  local.  My  judgment  has  ac- 
corded with  my  inclination  that  any  publicity  of  which  selections 
from  this  miscellany  may  be  thought  worthy,  should  await  a 
posthumous  date.  The  printed  effusions  of  my  pen  are  either 
known  or  of  but  little  bulk. 

For  portraits  of  the  several  characters  you  allude  to,  I  know 
not  that  I  can  furnish  your  canvas  with  any  important  mate- 
rials not  equally  within  your  reach,  as  I  am  sure  that  you  do 
not  need,  if  I  could  supply,  any  aid  to  your  pencil  in  the  use  of 
them.  Everything  relating  to  Washington  is  already  known  to 
the  world,  or  will  soon  be  made  known  through  Mr.  Sparks, 
with  the  exception  of  some  of  those  inside  views  of  character 
and  scenes  of  domestic  life  which  are  apart  from  ordinary  op- 
portunities of  observation.  And  it  may  be  presumed  that  in- 
teresting lights  will  be  let  in  even  on  those  exceptions  through 
the  private  correspondences  in  the  hands  of  Mr.  Sparks. 

Of  Franklin  I  had  no  personal  knowledge  till  we  served  to- 
gether in  the  Federal  Convention  of  1787,  and  the  part  he  took 
there  has  found  its  way  to  the  public,  with  the  exception  of  a 
few  anecdotes  which  belong  to  the  unveiled  part  of  the  proceed- 


1831.  LETTERS.  175 

ings  of  that  Assembly.  He  has  written  his  own  life,  and  no  man 
had  a  finer  one  to  write,  or  a  better  title  to  be  himself  the  wri- 
ter.    There  is  enough  of  blank,  however,  for  a  succeeding  pen. 

With  Mr.  Jefferson  I  was  not  acquainted  till  we  met  as  mem- 
bers of  the  first  Revolutionary  Legislature  of  Virginia,  in  1776; 
I  had,  of  course,  no  personal  knowledge  of  his  early  life.  Of 
his  public  career,  the  records  of  his  country  give  ample  informa- 
tion; and  of  the  general  features  of  his  character,  with  much  of 
his  private  habits,  and  of  his  peculiar  opinions,  his  writings  be- 
fore the  world,  to  which  additions  are  not  improbable,  are 
equally  explanatory.  The  obituary  eulogiums,  multiplied  by 
the  epoch  and  other  coincidences  of  his  death,  are  a  field  where 
some  things  not  unworthy  of  notice  may  perhaps  be  gleaned. 
It  may,  on  the  whole,  be  truly  said  of  him,  that  he  was  greatly 
eminent  for  the  comprehensiveness  and  fertility  of  his  genius, 
for  the  vast  extent  and  rich  variety  of  his  acquirements,  and 
particularly  distinguished  by  the  philosophic  impress  left  on 
every  subject  which  he  touched.  Nor  was  he  less  distinguished 
for  an  early  and  uniform  devotion  to  the  cause  of  liberty,  and 
systematic  preference  of  a  form  of  Government  squared  in  the 
strictest  degree  to  the  rights  of  man.  In  the  social  and  domes- 
tic spheres,  he  was  a  model  of  the  virtues  and  manners  which 
most  adorn  them. 

In  relation  to  Mr.  John  Adams,  I  had  no  personal  knowledge 
of  him  till  he  became  V.  President  of  the  United  States,  and 
then  saw  no  side  of  his  private  character  which  was  not  visi- 
ble to  all;  whilst  my  chief  knowledge  of  his  public  character 
and  career  was  acquired  by  means  now  accessible,  or  becoming 
so,  to  all.  His  private  papers  are  said  to  be  voluminous;  and 
when  opened  to  public  view,  will  doubtless  be  of  much  avail  to 
a  biographer.  His  official  correspondence  during  the  Revolu- 
tionary period,  just  published,  will  be  found  interesting  both  in 
a  historical  and  biographical  view.  That  he  had  a  mind  rich 
in  ideas  of  his  own,  as  well  as  its  learned  store,  with  an  ardent 
love  of  country,  and  the  merit  of  being  a  colossal  champion  of 
its  Independence,  must  be  allowed  by  those  most  offended  by 


176  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

the  alloy  in  Lis  Republicanism,  and  the  fervors  and  flights  origi" 
Dating  in  his  moral  temperament. 

Of  Mr.  Hamilton  I  ought,  perhaps,  to  speak  with  some  re- 
straint, though  my  feelings  assure  me  that  no  recollection  of 
political  collisions  could  control  the  justice  due  to  his  memory. 
That  he  possessed  intellectual  powers  of  the  first  order,  and  the 
moral  qualifications  of  integrity  and  honor  in  a  captivating  de- 
gree, has  been  decreed  to  him  by  a  suffrage  now  universal.  Tf 
his  theory  of  Government  deviated  from  the  Republican  stand- 
ard, he  had  the  candor  to  avow  it,  and  the  greater  merit  of  co- 
operating faithfully  in  maturing  and  supporting  a  system  which 
was  not  his  choice.  The  criticism  to  which  his  share  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  it  was  most  liable  was,  that  it  had  the  aspect  of 
an  effort  to  give  to  the  instrument  a  constructive  and  practical 
bearing  not  warranted  by  its  true  and  intended  character.  It 
is  said  that  his  private  files  have  been  opened  to  a  friend  who 
is  charged  with  the  task  you  contemplate.  If  he  be  not  a  citi- 
zen of  N.  York,  it  is  probable  that  in  collecting  private  mate- 
rials from  other  sources  your  opportunities  may  be  more  than 
equal  to  his. 

I  will,  on  this  occasion,  take  the  liberty  to  correct  a  statement 
of  Mr.  Hamilton  which  contradicts  mine  on  the  same  subject; 
and  which,  as  mine,  if  erroneous,  could  not  be  ascribed  to  a 
lapse  of  memory,  might  otherwise  be  an  impeachment  of  my  ve- 
racity. I  allude  to  the  discrepancy  between  the  memorandum 
given  by  Mr.  Hamilton  to  Mr.  Benson  distributing  the  numbers 
of  the  "  Federalist"  to  the  respective  writers,  and  the  distribu- 
tion communicated  by  me  at  an  early  day  to  a  particular  friend, 
and  finally  to  Mr.  Gideon,  for  his  edition  of  the  work  at  Wash- 
ington a  few  years  ago. 

The  reality  of  errors  in  the  statement  of  Mr.  Hamilton  ap- 
pears from  an  internal  evidence  in  some  of  the  papers.  Take, 
for  an  example,  N°  49,  which  contains  a  eulogy  on  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son, marking  more  of  the  warm  feelings  of  personal  friendship 
in  the  writer  than  at  any  time  belonged  to  Mr.  Hamilton.  But 
there  is  proof  of  another  sort  in  N°  64,  ascribed  in  the  memoran- 


1831.  LETTERS.  177 

dum  to  Mr.  Hamilton.  That  it  was  written  by  Mr.  Jay,  ia 
shewn  by  a  passage  in  his  life  by  Delaplaine,  obviously  derived 
directly  or  indirectly  from  Mr.  Jay  himself.  There  is  a  like 
proof  that  N°  54,  ascribed  to  Mr.  Jay,  was  not  written  by  him. 
Nor  is  it  difficult  to  account  for  errors  in  the  memorandum,  if 
recurrence  be  had  to  the  moment  at  which  a  promise  of  sucli  a 
one  was  fulfilled,  to  the  lumping  manner  in  which  it  was  made 
out,  and  to  the  period  of  time,  not  less  than  years,  be- 

tween the  date  of  the  "  Federalist "  and  that  of  the  memoran- 
dum; and  as  a  proof  of  the  fallibility  to  which  the  memory  of 
Mr.  Hamilton  was  occasionally  subject,  a  case  may  Tie  referred 
to  so  decisive  as  to  dispense  with  every  other.  In  the  year 
Mr.  Hamilton,  in  a  letter  answering  an  inquiry  of  Col.  Picker- 
ing concerning  the  plan  of  Government  which  he  had  espoused 
in  the  Convention  of  1787,  states,  that  at  the  close  of  the  Con- 
vention he  put  into  my  hands  a  draught  of  a  Constitution;  and 
in  that  draught  he  had  proposed  a  "  President  for  three  years."* 
Now,  the  fact  is,  that  in  that  plan,  the  original  of  which  I  as- 
certained several  years  ago  to  be  among  his  papers,  the  tenure 
of  office  for  the  President  is  not  three  years,  but  during  good  be- 
haviour. The  error  is  the  more  remarkable,  as  the  letter  apol- 
ogizes, according  to  my  recollection,  for  its  being  not  a  prompt 
one;  and  as  it  is  so  much  at  variance  with  the  known  cast  of 
Mr.  Hamilton's  political  tenets,  that  it  must  have  astonished 
his  political,  and,  most  of  all,  his  intimate  friends.  I  should  do 
injustice,  nevertheless,  to  myself  as  well  as  to  Mr.  Hamilton,  if 
I  did  not  express  my  perfect  confidence  that  the  misstatement 
was  involuntary,  and  that  he  was  incapable  of  any  that  was  not 
so. 

I  am  sorry,  sir,  that  I  could  not  make  a  better  contribution 
to  your  fund  of  biographical  matter.  Accept  it  as  an  evidence, 
at  least,  of  my  respect  for  your  wishes,  and  with  it  the  cordial 
remembrances  and  regards  in  which  Mrs.  M.  joins  me,  as  I  do 
her,  in  the  request  to  be  favorably  presented  to  Mrs.  Paulding. 

*  See  the  letter  in  Niles's  Register. 
VOL.  IV.  12 


178  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 


TO   JAMES   MONROE. 

Montpellier,  April  21,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  yours  of .  I  con- 
sidered the  advertisement  of  your  estate  in  Loudon  as  an  omen 
that  your  friends  in  Virginia  were  to  lose  you.  It  is  impossible 
to  gainsay  the  motives  to  which  you  yielded  in  making  N.  York 
your  residence,  though  I  fear  you  will  find  its  climate  unsuited 
to  your  period  of  life  and  the  state  of  your  health.  I  just  ob- 
serve, and  with  much  pleasure,  that  the  sum  voted  by  Congress, 
however  short  of  just  calculations,  escapes  the  loppings  to  which 
it  was  exposed  from  the  accounting  process  at  Washington,  and 
that  you  are  so  far  relieved  from  the  vexations  involved  in  it. 
The  result  will,  I  hope,  spare  you  at  least  the  sacrifice  of  an  un- 
timely sale  of  your  valuable  property;  and  I  would  fain  flatter 
myself,  that  with  an  encouraging  improvement  of  your  health, 
you  might  be  brought  to  reconsider  the  arrangement  which  fixes 
you  elsewhere.  The  effect  of  this,  in  closing  the  prospect  of  our 
ever  meeting  again,  afflicts  me  deeply;  certainly  not  less  so  than 
it  can  you.  The  pain  I  feel  at  the  idea,  associated  as  it  is  with 
a  recollection  of  the  long,  close,  and  uninterrupted  friendship 
which  united  us,  amounts  to  a  pang  which  I  cannot  well  ex- 
press, and  which  makes  me  seek  for  an  alleviation  in  the  possi- 
bility that  you  may  be  brought  back  to  us  in  the  wonted  degree 
of  intercourse.  This  is  a  happiness  my  feelings  covet,  notwith- 
standing the  short  period  I  could  expect  to  enjoy  it;  being  now, 
though  in  comfortable  health,  a  decade  beyond  the  canonical 
three-score-and-ten,  an  epoch  which  you  have  but  just  passed. 
As  you  propose  to  make  a  visit  to  Loudon  previous  to  the  noti- 
fied sale,  if  the  state  of  your  health  permits,  why  not,  with  the 
like  permission,  extend  the  trip  to  this  quarter?  The  journey, 
at  a  rate  of  your  own  choice,  might  co-operate  in  the  re-estab- 
lishment of  your  health,  whilst  it  would  be  a  peculiar  gratifica- 
tion to  your  friends,  and,  perhaps,  enable  you  to  join  your  col- 
leagues at  the  University  once  more  at  least.  It  is  much  to  be 
desired  that  you  should  continue,  as  long  as  possible,  a  member 
of  the  Board,  and  I  hope  you  will  not  send  in  your  resignation 


1831.  LETTERS.  179 

in  case  you  find  your  cough  and  weakness  giving  way  to  the 
influence  of  the  season  and  the  innate  strength  of  your  constitu- 
tion. I  will  not  despair  of  your  being  able  to  keep  up  your 
connexion  with  Virginia  by  retaining  Oak  Hill  and  making  it 
not  less  than  an  occasional  residence.  Whatever  may  be  the 
turn  of  tilings,  be  assured  of  the  unchangeable  interest  felt  by 
Mrs.  M.,  as  well  as  myself,  in  your  welfare,  and  in  that  of  all 
who  are  dearest  to  you. 


In  explanation  of  my  microscopic  writing,  I  must  remark  that 
the  older  I  grow  the  more  my  stiffening  fingers  make  smaller 
letters,  as  my  feet  take  shorter  steps;  the  progress  in  both  cases 
being,  at  the  same  time,  more  fatiguing  as  well  as  more  slow. 


TO   N.   P.   TRIST. 

Mat  5,  1831. 

DR  Sir, — I  received,  yesterday,  your  favor  of  the  2d,  with  its 
accompaniments.  I  thank  you  for  the  little  treatise  on  "  Men- 
tal Philology,"  which  I  reserve  for  perusal  at  the  earliest  leis- 
ure. From  the  reputed  talents  and  tenets  of  the  author  some- 
thing may  be  anticipated  well  written  and  out  of  the  trodden 
circle.  I  thank  you,  also,  for  the  rectified  copy  of  the  "  Distress 
for  Rent,"  «fcc,  and  return  the  one  formerly  sent. 

The  revolution  in  the  Cabinet  has  produced  here,  as  else- 
where, much  agitation  in  the  political  world.  In  what  form  the 
public  opinion  will  settle  down  is  unknown  to  those  who  know 
more  of  its  workings  than  I  do.  The  current  has  hitherto  set 
a  good  deal  against  Mr.  Van  Buren,  to  whom  I  the  less  doubt 
that  injustice  has  been  done,  as  that  opinion  has  the  sanction  of 
yours.  Mr.  Livingston  is  the  only  one  of  the  four  Heads  of 
Departments  designated  for  the  new  Cabinet  whom  I  personally 
know.  His  qualifications,  both  substantial  and  ornamental, 
speak  for  themselves. 


]80  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

TO    CHARLES    CARTER    LEE. 

Mat  17,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  9th,  inclosing 
a  long  latent  one  from  your  father.  My  acquaintance  with  him 
commenced  at  a  very  early  stage  of  our  lives;  and  our  friendly 
sympathies  never  lost  their  force,  though  deprived,  for  long  pe- 
riods, of  the  nourishing  influence  of  personal  intercourse,  and 
exposed  occasionally  by  the  disturbing  tendency  of  a  discord- 
ance in  political  opinions.  I  could  not  fail,  therefore,  to  be  in 
the  number  of  sinccrest  mourners  when  it  was  announced  that 
he  was  no  more;  and  to  be  gratified  now  by  the  evidence  in 
his  letter  that  his  affectionate  recollections  had  undergone  no 
change. 

It  is  not  strange  that  a  tempting  article,  like  selected  wine, 
should  disappear  in  such  a  lapse  of  time,  and  its  change  of  place. 
Had  it  reached  its  destination,  it  would  have  derived  its  best 
flavour  from  the  feelings  of  which  it  was  a  token. 

I  thank  you,  sir,  for  your  kind  sentiments  and  good  wishes, 
as  Mrs.  M.  does  for  her  share  in  them;  and  I  beg  you  to  accept, 
in  her  behalf  as  well  as  mine,  a  cordial  return  of  them. 


TO   BEN.    WATERHOUSE. 

Mat  27,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  in  due  time  your  letter  of  the  9th 
instant,  and  with  it  the  volume  on  the  authorship  of  "Junius" 
Although  it  found  me  but  little  at  leisure,  and  in  crippled 
health,  I  felt  too  much  respect  for  the  writer,  not  to  say  curi- 
osity for  the  subject,  also,  not  to  give  it  an  entire  reading. 

Whether  you  have  untied  the  knot  at  which  so  many  inge- 
nious hands  have  tugged  in  vain,  I  will  not  make  myself  a 
judge.  I  can  say,  at  least,  that  you  have  done  full  justice  to 
your  hypothesis;  and  that  you  have  garnished  it,  moreover, 
with  historical  facts,  individual  portraits,  and  vivid  anecdotes, 
that  have  improved  the  relish  of  the  subject. 


1831.  LETTERS.  181 

You  will  infer  from  those  remarks  that  I  could  not  hesitate 
a  moment  in  giving  the  volume  the  destination  which  makes  the 
University  of  Virginia  a  debtor  to  the  author.  Be  pleased  to 
accept,  at  the  same  time,  the  acknowledgments  due  from  myself, 
with  the  best  wishes  for  a  prolonged  and  happy  life,  in  which 
Mrs.  M.  cordially  joins  me. 


TO   JARED    SPARKS. 

June  1,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  yours  of  24th  ultimo,  and 
inclose  the  little  pamphlet  by  Gouverneur  Morris  which  it  refers 
to.  Unless  it  is  to  be  printed  entire  in  the  volume  you  are  pre- 
paring, I  should  wish  to  replace  it  in  the  collection  from  which 
it  is  taken.  Of  the  other  unofficial  writings  by  him,  I  have  but 
the  single  recollection  that  he  was  a  writer  for  the  newspapers 
in  1780  (being  then  a  member  of  Congress)  on  our  public  af- 
fairs, chiefly,  I  believe,  on  the  currency  and  resources  of  the  U. 
States.  It  was  about  the  time  that  the  scale  of  1  for  40  was 
applied  to  the  200,000,000  of  dollars  which  had  been  emitted; 
and  his  publications  were  probably  occasioned  by  the  crisis,  but 
of  the  precise  scope  of  them  I  cannot  speak.  I  became  a  member 
of  Congress  in  March  of  that  year,  just  after  the  fate  of  the  old 
emissions  had  been  decided  on,  and  the  subject  so  far  deprived 
of  its  interest.  In  the  Philadelphia  newspapers  of  that  period 
the  writings  in  question  might  probably  be  found,  and  verified 
by  the  style  if  not  the  name  of  the  author.  Whether  Mr.  Mor- 
ris wrote  a  pamphlet  about  Deane  is  a  point  on  which  I  can 
give  no  answer. 

May  I  ask  of  you  to  let  me  know  the  result  of  your  corres- 
pondence with  Charleston  on  the  subject  of  Mr.  Pinckney's 
draft  of  a  Constitution  for  the  U.  States  as  soon  as  it  is  ascer- 
tained? 

It  is  quite  certain  that  since  the  death  of  Col.  Few,  I  have 
been  the  only  living  signer  of  the  Constitution  of  the  U.  States. 
Of  the  members  who  were  present  and  did  not  sign,  and  of  those 


182  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

wlio  were  present  part  of  the  time,  but  had  left  the  Convention, 
it  is  equally  certain  that  not  one  has  remained  since  the  death 
of  Mr.  Lansing,  who  disappeared  so  mysteriously  not  very  long 
ago.  I  happen,  also,  to  be  the  sole  survivor  of  those  who  were 
members  of  the  Revolutionary  Congress  prior  to  the  close  of 
the  war;  as  I  had  been,  for  some  years,  of  the  members  of  the 
Convention  in  1776,  which  formed  the  first  Constitution  for 
Virginia.  Having  outlived  so  many  of  my  cotemporaries,  I 
ought  not  to  forget  that  I  may  be  thought  to  have  outlived  my- 
self. 


TO  J.   K.   PAULDING. 

June  6tb,  1831. 
Dear  Sir, — Since  my  letter  answering  yours  of  April  6th,  in 
which  I  requested  you  to  make  an  enquiry  concerning  a  small 
pamphlet  of  Charles  Pinckney  printed  at  the  close  of  the  Fed- 
eral Convention  of  1787,  it  has  occurred  to  me  that  the  pamph- 
let might  not  have  been  put  in  circulation,  but  only  presented 
to  his  friends,  &c.  In  that  way  I  may  have  become  possessed 
of  the  copy  to  which  I  referred  as  in  a  damaged  state.  On  this 
supposition  the  only  chance  of  success  must  be  among  the  books, 
&c,  of  individuals  on  the  list  of  Mr.  Pinckney's  political  asso- 
ciates and  personal  friends.  Of  those  who  belonged  to  N.  York, 
I  recollect  no  one  so  likely  to  have  received  a  copy  as  Rufus 
King.  If  that  was  the  case,  it  may  remain  with  his  represent- 
ative, and  I  would  suggest  an  informal  resort  to  that  quarter, 
with  a  hope  that  you  will  pardon  this  further  tax  on  your  kind- 
ness. 


TO   J.   K.   PAULDING. 

June  27,  1831. 
Dear  Sir, — With  your  favor  of  the  20th  instant  I  received 
the  volume  of  pamphlets  containing  that  of  Mr.  Charles  Pinck- 
ney, for  which  I  am  indebted  to  your  obliging  researches.    The 


1831.  LETTERS.  183 

volume  shall  be  duly  returned,  and  in  the  mean  time  duly  taken 
care  of.  I  have  not  sufficiently  examined  the  pamphlet  in  ques- 
tion, but  have  no  doubt  that  it  throws  light  on  the  object  to 
which  it  has  relation. 

I  had  previously  received  yours  of  the  13th,  and  must  remark 
that  you  have  not  rightly  seized  the  scope  of  what  was  said  in 
mine  of  April .  I  did  not  mean  that  I  had  in  view  a  His- 
tory of  any  sort,  public  or  personal;  but  only  a  preservation  of 
materials,  of  which  I  happened  to  be  a  recorder,  or  to  be  found 
in  my  voluminous  correspondences  with  official  associates  or 
confidential  friends.  By  the  first,  I  alluded  particularly  to  the 
proceedings  and  debates  of  the  latter  periods  of  the  Revolu- 
tionary Congress  and  of  the  Federal  Convention  in  1787,  of 
which,  in  both  cases,  I  had,  as  a  member,  an  opportunity  of 
taking  an  account. 

I  do  not  lose  sight  of  the  sketches  I  promised,  which,  how- 
ever, can  be  but  the  merest  skeleton,  with  references  to  my 
pigeon-holes  for  whatever  of  flesh  may  be  found  for  it. 


TO   MR.   INGERSOLL. 

Montpeimer,  June  25  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  friendly  letter  of  the  18th 
instant.  The  few  lines  which  answered  your  former  one  of  the 
21  January  last  were  written  in  haste  and  in  bad  health;  but 
they  expressed,  though  without  the  attention,  in  some  respects, 
due  to  the  occasion,  a  dissent  from  the  views  of  the  President 
as  to  a  Bank  of  the  United  States,  and  a  substitute  for  it,  to 
which  I  cannot  but  adhere.  The  objections  to  the  latter  have  ap- 
peared to  me  to  preponderate  greatly  over  the  advantages  ex- 
pected from  it,  and  the  constitutionality  of  the  power  I  still  re- 
gard as  sustained  by  the  considerations  to  which  I  yielded  in 
giving  my  assent  to  the  existing  Bank. 

The  charge  of  inconsistency  between  my  objection  to  the  con- 
stitutionality of  such  a  bank  in  1791  and  my  assent  in  1817, 
turns  on  the  question  how  far  legislative  precedents,  expound- 


184  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

ing  the  Constitution,  ought  to  guide  succeeding  Legislatures 
and  overrule  individual  opinions. 

Some  obscurity  has  been  thrown  over  the  question  by  con- 
founding it  with  the  respect  due  from  one  Legislature  to  laws 
passed  by  preceding  Legislatures.  But  the  two  cases  are  essen- 
tially different.  A  Constitution  being  derived  from  a  superior* 
authority,  is  to  be  expounded  and  obeyed,  not  controlled  or  va- 
ried, by  the  subordinate  authority  of  a  Legislature.  A  law,  on 
the  other  hand,  resting  on  no  higher  authority  than  that  pos- 
sessed by  every  successive  Legislature,  its  expediency  as  well 
as  its  meaning  is  within  the  scope  of  the  latter. 

The  case  in  question  has  its  true  analogy  in  the  obligation 
arising  from  judicial  expositions  of  the  law  on  succeedingjudges; 
the  Constitution  being  a  law  to  the  legislator,  as  the  law  is  a 
rule  of  decision  to  the  judge. 

And  why  are  judicial  precedents,  when  formed  on  due  discus- 
sion and  consideration,  and  deliberately  sanctioned  by  reviews 
and  repetitions,  regarded  as  of  binding  influence,  or,  rather,  of 
authoritative  force  in  settling  the  meaning  of  a  law?  It  must 
be  answered,  1st.  Because  it  is  a  reasonable  and  established 
axiom,  that  the  good  of  society  requires  that  the  rules  of  con- 
duct of  its  members  should  be  certain  and  known,  which  would 
not  be  the  case  if  any  judge,  disregarding  the  decision  of  his 
predecessors,  should  vary  the  rule  of  law  according  to  his  indiJ 
vidual  interpretation  of  it.  Misera  est  servitus  ubi  jus  est  aut 
vagum  aut  incognitum.  2.  Because  an  exposition  of  the  law 
publicly  made,  and  repeatedly  confirmed  by  the  constituted  au- 
thority, carries  with  it,  by  fair  inference,  the  sanction  of  those 
who,  having  made  the  law  through  their  legislative  organ,  ap- 
pear, under  such  circumstances,  to  have  determined  its  meaning 
through  their  judiciary  organ. 

Can  it  be  of  less  consequence  that  the  meaning  of  a  Constitu- 
tion should  be  fixed  and  known,  than  that  the  meaning  of  a  law 
should  be  so  ?  Can,  indeed,  a  law  be  fixed  in  its  meaning  and 
operation  unless  the  Constitution  be  so?  On  the  contrary,  if  a 
particular  Legislature,  differing  in  the  construction  of  the  Con- 
stitution from  a  series  of  preceding  constructions,  proceed  to 


1831.  LETTERS.  18o 

act  on  that  difference,  tliey  not  only  introduce  uncertainty  and 
instability  in  the  Constitution,  but  in  the  laws  themselves;  in- 
asmuch as  all  laws  preceding  the  new  construction  and  incon- 
sistent with  it  are  not  only  annulled  for  the  future,  but  virtually 
pronounced  nullities  from  the  beginning. 

But  it  is  said  that  the  legislator  having  sworn  to  support  the 
Constitution,  must  support  it  in  his  own  construction  of  it,  how- 
ever different  from  that  put  on  it  by  his  predecessors,  or  what- 
ever be  the  consequences  of  the  construction.  And  is  not  the 
judge  under  the  same  oath  to  support  the  law?  Yet,  has  it  ever 
been  supposed  that  he  was  required  or  at  liberty  to  disregard 
all  precedents,  however  solemnly  repeated  and  regularly  ob- 
served, and,  by  giving  effect  to  his  own  abstract  and  individual 
opinions,  to  disturb  the  established  course  of  practice  in  the  bu- 
siness of  the  community  ?  Has  the  wisest  and  most  conscientious 
judge  ever  scrupled  to  acquiesce  in  decisions  in  which  he  has 
been  overruled  by  the  matured  opinions  of  the  majority  of  his 
colleagues,  and  subsequently  to  conform  himself  thereto,  as  to 
authoritative  expositions  of  the  law  ?  And  is  it  not  reasonable 
that  the  same  view  of  the  official  oath  should  be  taken  by  a 
legislator,  acting  under  the  Constitution,  which  is  his  guide,  as 
is  taken  by  a  judge,  acting  under  the  law,  which  is  his? 

There  is,  in  fact  and  in  common  understanding,  a  necessity  of 
regarding  a  course  of  practice,  as  above  characterized,  in  the 
light  of  a  legal  rule  of  interpreting  a  law,  and  there  is  a  like 
necessity  of  considering  it  a  constitutional  rule  of  interpreting 
a  Constitution. 

That  there  may  be  extraordinary  and  peculiar  circumstances 
controlling  the  rule  in  both  cases,  may  be  admitted;  but  with 
such  exceptions  the  rule  will  force  itself  on  the  practical  judg- 
ment of  the  most  ardent  theorist.  He  will  find  it  impossible  to 
adhere,  and  act  officially  upon,  his  solitary  opinions  as  to  the 
meaning  of  the  law  or  Constitution,  in  opposition  to  a  construc- 
tion reduced  to  practice  during  a  reasonable  period  of  time; 
more  especially  when  no  prospect  existed  of  a  change  of  con- 
struction by  the  public  or  its  agents.  And  if  a  reasonable  pe- 
riod of  time,  marked  with  the  usual  sanctions,  would  not  bar 


18G  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

the  individual  prerogative,  there  could  be  no  limitation  to  its 
exercise,  although  the  danger  of  error  must  increase  with  the 
increasing  oblivion  of  explanatory  circumstances,  and  with  the 
continual  changes  in  the  import  of  words  and  phrases. 

Let  it,  then,  be  left  to  the  decision  of  every  intelligent  and  can- 
did judge,  which,  on  the  whole,  is  most  to  be  relied  on  for  the 
true  and  safe  construction  of  a  constitution;  that  which  has  the 
uniform  sanction  of  successive  legislative  bodies,  through  a  pe- 
riod of  years  and  under  the  varied  ascendency  of  parties;  or  that 
which  depends  upon  the  opinions  of  every  uew  Legislature, 
heated  as  it  may  be  by  the  spirit  of  party,  eager  in  the  pursuit 
of  some  favourite  object,  or  led  astray  by  the  eloquence  and  ad- 
dress of  popular  statesmen,  themselves,  perhaps,  under  the  in- 
fluence of  the  same  misleading  causes. 

It  was  in  conformity  with  the  view  here  taken,  of  the  respect 
due  to  deliberate  and  reiterated  precedents,  that  the  Bank  of 
the  United  States,  though  on  the  original  question  held  to  be 
unconstitutional,  received  the  Executive  signature  in  the  year 
1817.  The  act  originally  establishing  a  bank  had  undergone 
ample  discussions  in  its  passage  through  the  several  branches 
of  the  Government.  It  had  been  carried  into  execution  through- 
out a  period  of  twenty  years  with  annual  legislative  recogni- 
tions; in  one  instance,  indeed,  with  a  positive  ramification  of  it 
into  a  uew  State;  and  with  the  entire  acquiescence  of  all  the 
local  authorities,  as  well  as  of  the  nation  at  large;  to  all  of 
which  may  be  added,  a  decreasing  prospect  of  any  change  in  the 
public  opinion  adverse  to  the  constitutionality  of  such  an  insti- 
tution. A  veto  from  the  Executive,  under  these  circumstances, 
with  an  admission  of  the  expediency  and  almost  necessity  of  the 
measure,  would  have  been  a  defiance  of  all  the  obligations  de- 
rived from  a  course  of  precedents  amounting  to  the  requisite 
evidence  of  the  national  judgment  and  intention. 

It  has  been  contended  that  the  authority  of  precedents  was  in 
that  case  invalidated  by  the  consideration  that  they  proved  only 
a  respect  for  the  stipulated  duration  of  the  bank,  with  a  tolera- 
tion of  it  until  the  law  should  expire;  and  by  the  casting  vote 
given  in  the  Senate  by  the  Vice  President,  in  the  year  1811, 


1831.  LETTERS.  187 

against  a  bill  for  establishing  a  National  Bank,  the  vote  being 
expressly  given  on  the  ground  of  unconstitutionality.  But  if 
the  law  itself  was  unconstitutional,  the  stipulation  was  void,  and 
could  not  be  constitutionally  fulfilled  or  tolerated.  And  as  to 
the  negative  of  the  Senate  by  the  casting  vote  of  the  Presiding 
Officer,  it  is  a  fact,  well  understood  at  the  time,  that  it  resulted, 
not  from  an  equality  of  opinions  in  that  assembly  on  the  power 
of  Congress  to  establish  a  bank,  but  from  a  junction  of  those 
who  admitted  the  power,  but  disapproved  the  plan  with  those 
who  denied  the  power.  On  a  simple  question  of  constitution- 
ality there  was  a  decided  majority  in  favour  of  it. 


TO . 

June  28.  1831. 


Dear  Sir,— I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  12th  instant, 
and  am  very  sensible  of  the  good  views  with  which  you  request 
an  answer  at  length  to  the  claim  of  the  new  States  to  the  Fed- 
eral lands  within  their  limits.  But  you  could  not  have  suf- 
ficiently adverted  to  the  extent  of  such  a  job,  nor  have  recol- 
lected the  age  which  I  have  now  reached,  itself  an  infirmity, 
with  others  always  more  or  less  incident  to  it;  nor  have  been 
aware  of  the  calls  on  me,  as  the  only  surviving  source  of  infor- 
mation on  certain  subjects  now  under  anxious  investigation  in 
quarters  which  I  am  bound  to  respect.  I  feel  the  less  regret 
at  being  obliged  to  shrink  from  the  task  you  mark  out  for  me, 
as  I  am  confident  there  are  many  equally,  if  not  better,  quali- 
fied for  it,  and  as  it  cannot  be  long  before  the  claim,  if  not 
abandoned,  must  be  taken  up  in  Congress,  where  it  can  and 
will  be  demolished,  unless,  indeed,  the  able  champions  be  kept 
back  by  a  hankering  after  a  Western  popularity.  In  my  situa- 
tion I  can  only  say,  and  for  yourself,  not  for  the  press,  that  I 
have  always  viewed  the  claim  as  so  unfair  and  unjust,  so  con- 
trary to  the  certain  and  notorious  intentions  of  the  parties 
to  the  case,  and  so  directly  in  the  teeth  of  the  condition  on 
which  the  lands  were  ceded  to  the  Union,  that  if  a  technical 


jgg  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

title  could  be  made  out  by  the  claimants,  it  ought  in  conscience 
and  honour  to  be  waived.  But  the  title  in  the  people  of  the 
United  States  rests  on  a  foundation  too  just  and  solid  to  be 
shaken  by  any  technical  or  metaphysical  arguments  whatever. 
The  known  and  acknowledged  intentions  of  the  parties  at  the 
time,  with  a  prescriptive  sanction  of  so  many  years  consecrated 
by  the  intrinsic  principles  of  equity,  would  overrule  even  the 
most  explicit  declarations  and  terms,  as  has  been  done  without 
the  aid  of  that  principle  in  the  slaves,  who  remain  such  in  spite 
of  the  declarations  that  all  men  are  born  equally  free. 

I  wish  you  success  in  the  election  for  which  you  are  made  a 
candidate.  You  do  not  name,  and  I  do  not  know,  your  com- 
petitor. He  will  doubtless  derive  some  advantage  from  your 
long  absences.  But,  being  now  on  the  ground,  you  will  be  able 
to  meet  the  objection  with  the  best  explanation. 


TO   DR.    JOHN   W.    FRANCIS. 

Montpellier,  July  9th,  1831. 

D*  Sir, — Your  favor  of  the  4th,  communicating  the  death  of 
Mr.  Monroe,  was  duly  received.  I  had  been  prepared  for  the 
event,  by  information  of  its  certain  approach.  The  time  of  it 
was  so  far  happy,  as  it  added  another  to  the  coincidences  before 
so  remarkable  and  so  memorable.  You  have  justly  ranked  him 
with  the  heroes  and  patriots  who  have  deserved  best  of  their 
country.  No  one  knew  him  better  than  I  did,  or  had  a  sincerer 
affection  for  him,  or  condoles  more  deeply  with  those  to  whom 
he  was  most  dear. 

With  the  thanks  which  I  owe  you,  be  pleased  to  accept,  sir, 
the  tender  of  my  esteem  and  my  cordial  salutations. 


TO  ALEXANDER   HAMILTON. 

Jclt  9th,  1831. 

Dear  Sir,— Your  letter  of  June  30  was  duly  received,  and 
the  death  of  Mr.  Monroe,  which  it  anticipated,  became,  I  learn, 


1831.  LETTERS.  189 

a  sad  reality  on  the  4th  instant,  its  date  associating  it  with  the 
coincidences  before  so  remarkable  and  so  memorable. 

The  feelings  with  which  the  event  was  received  by  me  may 
be  inferred  from  the  long  and  uninterrupted  friendship  which 
united  us,  and  the  intimate  knowledge  I  had  of  his  great  public 
merits,  and  his  endearing  private  virtues.  I  condole  in  his  loss 
most  deeply  with  those  to  whom  he  was  most  dear.  "We  may 
cherish  the  consolation,  nevertheless,  that  his  memory,  like  that 
of  the  other  heroic  worthies  of  the  Revolution  gone  before  him, 
will  be  embalmed  in  the  grateful  affections  of  a  posterity  enjoy- 
ing the  blessings  which  he  contributed  to  procure  for  it. 

With  my  thanks  for  the  kind  attention  manifested  by  your 
letter,  I  pray  you  to  accept  assurances  of  my  friendly  esteem 
and  my  good  wishes. 


TO   TENCH   RINGGOLD. 

Montpellier,  July  12,  1831. 

DR  Sir, — I  received  in  the  due  times  your  two  favors  of  July 
7  and  8,  the  first  giving  the  earliest,  the  last  the  fullest  account 
that  reached  me  of  the  death  of  our  excellent  friend;*  and  I 
cannot  acknowledge  these  communications  without  adding  the 
thanks  which  I  owe,  in  common  with  those  to  whom  he  was 
most  dear,  for  the  devoted  kindness  on  your  part  during  the 
lingering  illness  which  he  could  not  survive. 

I  need  not  say  to  you,  who  so  well  know,  how  highly  I  rated 
the  comprehensiveness  and  character  of  his  mind;  the  purity 
and  nobleness  of  his  principles;  the  importance  of  his  patriotic 
services;  and  the  many  private  virtues  of  which  his  whole  life 
was  a  model;  nor  how  deeply,  therefore,  I  must  sympathize,  on 
his  loss,  with  those  who  feel  it  most.  A  close  friendship,  con- 
tinued through  so  long  a  period  and  such  diversified  scenes,  had 
grown  into  an  affection  very  imperfectly  expressed  by  that 
term;  and  I  value  accordingly  the  manifestation  in  his  last 
hours  that  the  reciprocity  never  abated. 

*  Mr.  Monroe. 


190  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 


TO    GOVERNOR   STOKES,    OF   N.    CAROLINA. 

Jrr.Y  15th,  1831. 

DR  Sir, — I  observe  in  a  newspaper  paragraph,  referring  to 
the  late  fire  in  Raleigh,  a  remark  that  nothing  was  saved  from, 
the  Library  of  the  State,  particularly  "Lawson's  History  of  it,7' 
which  had  not  been  procured  without  difficulty.  Happening  to 
possess  a  copy  of  the  work,  I  inclose  it,  with  a  request  that  it 
may  be  permitted  to  supply  the  loss;  praying  you  to  accept  at 
the  same  time  assurances  of  my  great  consideration  and  respect. 


TO   GENERAL   BERNARD. 

Montpellier,  July  16,  1831. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  just  received  your  letter  of  the  12th  instant. 
However  much  you  may  overrate  my  title  to  the  sentiments  it 
expresses,  it  will  always  be  a  gratifying  recollection  that  I  had 
my  share  in  obtaining  for  the  United  States  your  invaluable 
aid  in  the  defensive  system  now  so  well  matured  and  so  exten- 
sively executed.  It  is  with  great  pleasure,  I  add,  sir,  that 
whilst  your  distinguished  talents  and  indefatigable  application 
of  them  justly  claim  the  tribute  of  grateful  acknowledgments 
from  the  public,  your  social  and  personal  qualities,  and  those  of 
your  estimable  and  amiable  family,  have  won  the  best  feelings 
of  individuals. 

With  these  impressions,  T  cannot  learn  without  regret  the 
loss  we  are  about  to  sustain.  But  it  being  impossible  to  disap- 
prove the  considerations  which  lead  to  it,  it  only  remains  to 
assure  you  of  my  sincere  wishes  that  the  career  before  you  may 
be  as  prosperous  as,  I  am  persuaded,  it  will  be  guided  by  a  pure 
patriotism  and  a  comprehensive  philanthropy. 


1831.  LETTERS.  19X 


TO    ANDREW   BIGELOW. 

Rev0  Sir, — I  have  received,  with  your  letter  of  the  15th  in- 
stant, a  copy  of  your  "  Election  Sermon  on  the  6th  of  Jany,"  and 
thank  you  for  the  pleasure  afforded  by  the  able  and  instructive 
lessons  which  it  so  impressively  adapted  to  the  occasion. 

I  cannot  conceal  from  myself  that  your  letter  has  indulged  a 
partiality  which  greatly  overrates  my  public  services.  I  may 
say,  nevertheless,  that  I  am  among  those  who  are  most  anxious 
for  the  preservation-  of  the  Union  of  the  States,  and  for  the  suc- 
cess of  the  constitutional  experiment  of  which  it  is  the  basis. 
We  owe  it  to  ourselves,  and  to  the  world,  to  watch,  to  cherish, 
and,  as  far  as  possible,  to  perfect  a  new  modification  of  the 
powers  of  Government,  which  aims  at  the  better  security 
against  external  danger  and  internal  disorder,  a  better  pro- 
vision for  national  strength  and  individual  rights,  than  had 
been  exemplified  under  any  previous  form. 

I  pray  you,  sir,  to  be  assured  of  my  sensibility  for  your  kind 
and  comprehensive  wishes  for  my  welfare,  and  of  the  sincerity 
with  which  a  return  of  them  is  offered. 


TO    MATHEW    CAREY. 

Montpellier,  July  27,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  favor  of  the  21st,  with  your 
commencing  address  to  the  citizens  of  South  Carolina.  The 
strange  doctrines  and  misconceptions  prevailing  in  that  quarter 
are  much  to  be  deplored;  and  the  tendency  of  them  the  more  to 
be  dreaded,  as  they  are  patronized  by  statesmen  of  shining  tal- 
ents and  .patriotic  reputations.  To  trace  the  great  causes  of 
this  state  of  things,  out  of  which  these  unhappy  aberrations  have 
sprung,  in  the  effect  of  markets  glutted  with  the  products  of 
the  land  and  with  the  land  itself;  to  appeal  to  the  nature  of  the 
constitutional  compact  as  precluding  a  right  in  any  one  of  the 
parties  to  renounce  it  at  will,  by  giving  to  all  an  equal  right  to 
judge  of  its  obligations,  and,  as  the  obligations  are  mutual,  a 


192  WORKS    OF    MAD  IS  OX.  1831. 

right  to  enforce  correlative  with  a  right  to  dissolve  them;  to 
make  manifest  the  impossibility  as  well  as  injustice  of  executing 
the  laws  of  the  Union,  particularly  the  laws  of  commerce,  if 
even  a  single  State  be  exempt  from  their  operation;  to  lay  open 
the  effects  of  a  withdrawal  of  a  single  State  from  the  Union  on 
the  practical  conditions  and  relations  of  the  others,  thrown 
apart  by  the  intervention  of  a  foreign  nation;  to  expose  the  ob- 
vious, inevitable,  and  disastrous  consequences  of  a  separation 
of  the  States,  whether  into  alien  Confederacies  or  individual 
nations; — these  are  topics  which  present  a  task  well  worthy  the 
best  efforts  of  the  best  friends  of  their  country,  and  I  hope  you 
will  have  all  the  success  which  your  extensive  information  and 
disinterested  views  merit. 

If  the  States  cannot  live  together  in  harmony  under  the  au- 
spices of  such  a  Government  as  exists,  and  in  the  midst  of  bless- 
ings such  as  have  been  the  fruits  of  it,  what  is  the  prospect 
threatened  by  the  abolition  of  a  common  Government,  with  all 
the  rivalships,  collisions,  and  animosities  inseparable  from  such 
an  event?  The  entanglements  and  conflicts  of  commercial  reg- 
ulations, especially  as  affecting  the  inland  and  other  non-im- 
porting States,  and  a  protection  of  fugitive  slaves  substituted 
for  the  obligatory  surrender  of  them,  would,  of  themselves, 
quickly  kindle  the  passions  which  are  the  forerunners  of  war. 

My  health  has  not  been  good  for  several  years,  and  is  at  pres- 
ent much  crippled  by  rheumatism;  this,  with  my  great  age,  warns 
me  to  be  as  little  as  possible  before  the  public,  and  to  give  way 
to  others,  who,  with  the  same  love  of  their  country,  are  more 
able  to  be  useful  to  it. 


TO    GENERAL   LA    FAYETTE. 

MONTPELLIER,  Aug1  3,  1831. 

Mr  dear  Sir, — My  last  letter  of  December  12th  was  written 
with  a  hope  that  General  Bernard,  then  about  to  visit  France, 
would  be  the  bearer;  but  it  did  not,  I  suspect,  overtake  him.  I 
hope,  however,  it  did  not  miscarry  altogether.    I  inclose  this  to 


1831.  LETTERS.  193 

liim  in  confidence  that  it  will  reach  New  York  before  the  packet 
sails.  The  General  is  so  fully  acquainted  with  our  affairs,  great 
and  small,  that  you  can  learn  every  thing  worth  knowing  from 
his  lips  better  than  from  my  pen.  I  will  remark  only,  the  anom- 
alous doctrines  of  S.  Carolina  and  the  gross  exaggerations  of 
the  effects  of  the  tariff,  although  apparently  in  a  train  for  more 
systematic  support,  are  less  and  less  formidable  to  the  public 
tranquillity.  S.  Carolina  herself  is  becoming  more  divided,  and 
the  Southern  people  generally  more  and  more  disposed  to  cal- 
culate the  value  of  the  Union  by  the  consequences  of  disunion. 
In  the  mean  time,  we  are  mortified  and  grieved,  as  you  will  be, 
at  the  aspect  which  has  been  given  to  our  political  horizon  and 
the  effect  of  it  on  those  who  cannot  know  that  the  clouds  pro- 
ducing it  are  but  local  and  transient.  Our  anxieties  now  are 
chiefly  turned  to  the  aspect  of  things  on  your  side  of  the  Atlan- 
tic; to  the  fate  of  Poland;  its  bearing  on  the  crisis  in  France; 
and  the  connexion  of  both  with  the  general  struggle  between 
liberty  and  despotism.  Imperfectly  informed,  as  we  are,  on  many 
points,  we  look  to  your  views  as  the  best  guide  to  our  judgments 
and  wishes;  regretting  that  you  are  not  nearer  the  helm,  but 
persuaded  that  your  counsels  are  felt  by  the  nation  whose  im- 
pulse the  helm  must  obey. 

My  health  has  not  been  good  for  several  years,  and  I  am  at 
present  suffering  under  an  obstinate  attack  of  rheumatism,  which 
you  will  perceive  has  not  spared  even  my  fingers.  I  could  not, 
however,  forego  the  opportunity  by  General  Bernard,  for  whose 
loss  we  are  consoled,  by  the  services  expected  by  his  country, 
of  expressing  my  unalterable  affection  and  devoted  attachment. 
Mrs.  Madison  offers,  at  the  same  time,  her  cordial  regards;  and 
we  unite  in  extending  all  our  best  wishes  to  the  individuals  of 
your  family. 

VOL.  IV.  13 


194  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 


TO   ROBERT   WALSH. 

Montpellier,  August  22d,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  inclose  the  answer  of  Mr.  Scott  on  the  subject 
of  Bishop  Madison,  as  just  received,  that  you  may  extract  the 
materials  suited  to  your  object. 

The  intellectual  power  and  diversified  learning  of  the  Bishop 
may  justly  be  spoken  of  in  strong  terms,  and  few  men  have 
equally  deserved  the  praise  due  to  a  model  of  all  the  virtues, 
social,  domestic,  and  personal,  which  adorn  and  endear  the  hu- 
man character.  He  was  particularly  distinguished  by  a  can- 
dour, a  benevolence,  a  politeness  of  mind,  and  a  courtesy  of 
manner,  that  won  the  confidence  and  affection  on  the  shortest 
acquaintance. 

It  would  be  improper  to  omit,  as  a  feature  in  his  portrait,  that 
he  was  a  devoted  friend  to  our  Revolution  and  to  the  purest 
principles  of  a  Government  founded  on  the  rights  of  man.  The 
period  of  his  first  visit  to  Gr.  Britain  led  to  conversations  on  the 
subject  of  the  war  with  persons  of  high  standing.  Among  them 
was  Doctor  Robertson,  the  historian,  to  whom  he  had  letters  of 
introduction.  The  Doctor,  abstaining  from  the  question  of  right, 
remarked,  that  nothing  astonished  him  so  much  as  that  the  Col- 
onies should  have  conceived  it  possible  to  resist  such  a  power 
as  that  of  the  Mother  Country.  This  was  about  the  time  of 
Burgoyne's  surrender. 


TO    ELISHA   SMITH. 

September  11,  1831. 
I  have  received,  sir,  your  letter  of  the  24th  ultimo,  in  which 
you  request  my  opinion  on  several  points  involved  in  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States. 

It  might  not  be  proper  at  any  time,  and  especially  at  the  pres- 
ent, to  advance  mere  opinions  in  such  a  case  without  discussing 
the  grounds  on  which  they  rest;  and  this  is  a  task  which  I  may 
be  excused  from  undertaking  at  the  ao;c  I  have  reached,  now 


1831.  LETTERS.  195 

the  eighty-first  year,  and  under  a  painful  rheumatism  which  has 
for  some  time  been  my  companion. 

I  may  say,  in  brief,  as  may  be  gathered  from  newspapers,  that 
I  consider  the  opinions  adverse  to  the  constitutionality  of  the 
Bank  of  the  United  States,  as  overruled  by  the  kind  and  degree 
of  sanctions  given  to  the  establishment;  that  the  restraint  on 
the  States  from  emitting  bills  of  credit  was  understood  to  have 
reference  to  such  as  were  made  a  legal  tender;  and  that  a  Bank 
of  the  United  States  may  be  of  peculiar  aid  in  controlling  sus- 
pensions of  specie  payments  in  State  banks,  and  in  securing  the 
advantages  of  a  sound  and  uniform  currency. 

As  to  the  precise  course  to  be  taken  by  Congress  on  the  ex- 
piration of  the  existing  charter,  I  am  willing  to  confide  in  the 
wisdom  of  that  body,  availing  itself  of' the  lights  of  experience, 
past  and  in  progress. 

Well  assured  of  the  worthy  motives  of  your  letter,  I  could 
not  withhold  this  mark  of  respect  for  them;  adding  only,  a  re- 
cpaest  that  it  may  not  bring  me  in  any  way  before  the  public, 
and  that  you  will  accept  the  offer  of  my  friendly  salutations  and 
good  wishes. 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    CABELL. 

Montpellier,  Sept.  16,  1831. 
Dear  Sir, — I  did  not  receive  your  pamphlet  till  a  few  days 
ago,  and  your  letter  of  the  29th  ultimo  till  yesterday.  I  thank 
you  for  the  former,  which  did  not  need  the  apology  it  coutains 
to  me.  I  am  not  surprised  at  the  good  reception  it  meets  with. 
The  views  it  presents  of  its  topics,  and  the  documents  and  ex- 
tracts enforcing  them,  form  an  appeal  to  intelligent  readers  that 
could  not  be  without  effect  in  spite  of  the  prejudices  encoun- 
tered. I  thank  you  also  for  the  circumstantial  communications 
>u  your  letter,  and  congratulate  you  on  the  event  which  restores 
you  to  the  public  councils,  where  your  services  will  be  valuable 
on  several  accounts,  particularly  in  defending  the  Constitution 
and  Union  against  the  false  doctrines  which  assail  them.    That 


196  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

of  nullification  seems  to  be  generally  abandoned  in  Virginia  by 
those  who  had  most  leaning  towards  it.  But  it  still  flourishes 
in  the  hot-bed  where  it  sprung  up,  and  will  probably  not  die 
away  while  mistaken  causes  of  exaggerated  sufferings  continue 
to  nourish  it;  while  the  tariff,  which  produced  it,  is  exclusively 
charged  with  the  inevitable  effects  of  a  market  equally  glutted 
with  the  products  of  the  land  and  with  the  land  itself. 

I  know  not  whence  the  idea  could  proceed  that  I  concurred 
in  the  doctrine,  that  although  a  State  could  not  nullify  a  law 
of  the  Union,  it  had  a  right  to  secede  from  the  Union.  Both 
spring  from  the  same  poisonous  root,  unless  the  right  to  secede 
be  limited  to  cases  of  intolerable  oppression,  absolving  the  party 
from  its  constitutional  obligations. 

I  hope  that  all  who  now  see  the  absurdity  of  nullification, 
will  see  also  the  necessity  of  rejecting  the  claim  to  effect  it 
through  the  State  judiciaries,  which  can  only  be  kept  in  their 
constitutional  career  by  the  control  of  the  federal  jurisdiction. 
Take  the  linch-pins  from  a  carriage,  and  how  soon  would  a 
wheel  be  off  its  axle;  an  emblem  of  the  speedy  fate  of  the  fed- 
eral system,  were  the  parties  to  it  loosened  from  the  authority 
which  confines  them  to  their  spheres. 


TO   J.    Q.    ADAMS. 

Montpei,ltek,  Sept'  23,  1831. 

J.  M.,  with  his  best  respects  to  Mr.  Adams,  thanks  him  for 
the  copy  of  his  eulogy  on  the  life  and  character  of  James  Mon- 
roe. 

Not  only  must  the  friends  of  Mr.  Monroe  be  gratified  by  the 
just  and  happy  tribute  paid  to  his  memory;  the  historian,  also, 
will  be  a  debtor  for  the  interesting  materials  and  the  eloquent 
samples  of  the  use  to  be  made  of  them  which  will  be  found  in 
its  pages. 


1831.  LETTERS.  197 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    CABELL. 

MONTPELLIER,  Octr  5,   1831. 

Dear  Sir, — Among  my  letters  from  Judge  Pendleton  is  one 
which  relates  to  the  Judicial  Bill,  as  then  before  the  Senate  of 
the  United  States.  A  copy  of  it  had  been  sent  to  him  by  R.  IT. 
Lee,  with  a  request  of  his  observations  on  it,  and  a  copy  of 
these  inclosed  by  Mr.  Pendleton  in  his  letter  to  me.  It  is  re- 
markable that,  although  the  observations  are  numerous,  and 
descend  to  minute  criticisms,  none  of  them  touch  the  section 
which  gives  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  its  con- 
trolling-jurisdiction over  the  State  Judiciaries.  In  the  letter  of 
Mr.  Pendleton  to  me  inclosing  his  observations,  it  appears  that 
he  would  have  preferred  to  the  plan  of  the  Bill,  a  federal  use 
of  the  State  Courts,  with  an  appeal  from  the  Supreme  Courts 
of  the  States  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  [States.] 
Wishing  to  learn  what  he  had  said  in  his  answer  to  R.  H.  Lee, 
inclosing  his  observations,  I  requested  a  friend,  intimate  with 
Mr.  Ludwell  Lee,  to  make  the  enquiry.  From  the  answer  to 
this  request,  I  find  that  the  letters  from  Mr.  Pendleton  to  R. 
H.  Lee  had  all  passed  into  the  hands  of  his  grandson,  R.  H. 
Lee,  who  had  finally  deposited  them  in  the  University  of  Vir- 
ginia. Should  you  have  an  early  occasion  to  visit  Charlottes- 
ville I  will  ask  the  favor  of  you  to  examine  that  particular  let- 
ter, and  let  me  know  how  far  it  corroborates  the  view  taken  of 
the  subject  in  the  letter  to  me.  You  are  aware  of  the  weight 
of  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Pendleton,  and  its  value  if  opposed  to  the 
nullifying  power  of  a  State  through  its  Judiciary  department. 
I  find  that  Col.  Taylor's  authority  is  in  print  for  the  ultimate 
jurisdiction  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  over  the 
boundary  between  the  United  States  and  the  States.  Should 
you  not  be  likely  to  have  an  early  call  towards  the  University, 
be  so  good  as  to  let  me  know  it,  and  I  will  transfer  the  task 
requested  of  you  to  some  one  on  the  spot. 

Hoping  this  will  find  your  health  restored,  I  offer  my  best 
wishes  for  its  continuance,  and  for  every  other  happiness.     My 


198 


WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 


own  health  is  still  under  the  invasion  of  rheumatism.     With 
cordial  esteem. 


TO   PROFESSOR   TUCKER. 

Oct"  17,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  understand  that  the  correspondence  between 
Judge  Pendleton  and  Richard  H.  Lee  has  been  deposited  by  the 
grandson  of  the  latter  in  the  University  of  Virginia,  and  I  find 
among  the  letters  of  the  former  to  me,  one  in  which  he  incloses 
a  copy  of  remarks  on  the  original  Judicial  bill,  then  depending 
in  Congress,  which  had  been  sent  to  him  by  R.  H.  Lee,  then  a 
member  of  the  Senate,  with  a  request  of  his  opinion  on  it.  The 
letter  of  the  Judge  to  me  does  not  approve  of  the  plan  of  the 
bill,  but  the  25  section  is  not  noticed  among  the  many  objec- 
tionable passages  suggested  to  his  correspondent  as  needing 
revision.  From  the  letter  to  me  it  appears  that  the  Judge 
would  have  preferred  a  Federal  use  of  the  State  Courts,  with 
an  appeal  from  the  Supreme  Courts  of  the  States  to  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  U.  States.  Do  me  the  favor  to  examine  the 
letter  of  Mr.  Pendleton,  inclosing  his  remarks  to  Mr.  Lee,  and 
let  me  know  whether  there  be  in  it  anything,  and  if  any,  what, 
that  relates  to  the  appellate  supremacy  of  the  Federal  Judiciary 
over  the  State  Judiciary. 


to  townsend,  (s.  c.) 

MONTPELLIER,  Oct,  18,   1831. 

Dear  Sir,— I  received  on  the  14th  your  letter  of  the  3d  in- 
stant, and  will  endeavor  to  answer  the  several  queries  contained 
in  it  according  to  my  knowledge  and  recollections.  I  shall  do 
it,  however,  with  a  wish  that  you  may  keep  in  mind  the  reserve 
of  my  name,  which,  you  are  aware,  must  be  most  agreeable  to 
me.  It  is  so,  not  because  I  am  unwilling  to  be  publicly  respon- 
sible for  my  statements  and  sentiments  where  the  occasion  ab 


1831.  LETTERS.  199 

solutcly  demands  it,  but  because  where  that,  as  at  present,  ;s 
not  the  case,  my  appearance  before  the  public  might  be  con- 
strued into  an  intrusion  into  questions  of  a  party  character,  and 
because  I  might  be  exposed  to  the  alternative  of  giving,  by  my 
silence,  a  sanction  to  erroneous  criticisms  or  of  taking  part  in 
the  warfare  of  politics  unbecoming  my  age  and  my  situation. 

You  ask  "  whether  Mr.  Jefferson  was  really  the  author  of 
the  Kentucky  Resolutions  of  1799."  The  inference  that  he  was 
not  is  as  conclusive  as  it  is  obvious,  from  his  letter  to  Col.  Wil- 
son Carey  Nicholas  of  September  5,  1799,  which  expressly  de- 
clines, for  reasons  stated,  preparing  anything  for  the  Legisla- 
ture of  that  year. 

Ao-ain,  "  whether  the  father  of  the  Mr.  Nicholas  referred  to 
in  the  letter  of  December  11,  1821,  as  having  introduced  the 
resolutions  of  1798  into  the  Kentucky  Legislature,  be  not  the 
same  individual  to  whom  Mr.  Jefferson  alludes  as  the  brother 
of  Col.  Wilson  Carey  Nicholas,  in  a  letter  addressed  to  the  lat- 
ter on  the  5th  September,  1799,  vol.  iii,  p.  420."  He  was  the 
elder  brother,  and  his  name  George.  He  died  prior  to  the 
Kentucky  resolutions  of  1799. 

What  might  or  would  have  been  the  meaning  attached  to  the 
term  "nullify"  by  Mr.  Jefferson,  is  to  be  gathered  from  his  lan- 
guage in  the  resolutions  of  1798  and  elsewhere,  as  in  his  letter 
to  Mr.  Giles,  December  25, 1825,  viz,  to  extreme  cases,  as  alone 
justifying  a  resort  to  any  forcible  relief.  That  he  ever  asserted 
a  right  in  a  single  State  to  arrest  the  execution  of  an  act  of 
Congress,  the  arrest  to  be  valid  and  permanent  unless  reversed 
by  three-fourths  of  the  States,  is  countenanced  by  nothing  known 
to  have  been  said  or  done  by  him.  In  his  letter  to  Major  Cart- 
wright,  he  refers  to  a  Convention  as  a  peaceable  remedy  for 
conflicting  claims  of  power  in  our  compound  Government;  but 
whether  he  alluded  to  a  convention  as  prescribed  by  the  Con- 
stitution, or  brought  about  by  any  other  mode,  his  respect  for 
the  will  of  majorities,  as  the  vital  principle  of  Republican  Gov- 
ernment, makes  it  certain  that  he  could  not  have  meant  a  con- 
vention in  which  a  minority  of  seven  States  was  to  prevail  over 
seventeen,  either  in  amending  or  expounding  the  Constitution. 


200  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

Whether  the  debates  in  Kentucky  on  the  resolutions  of  1798- 
99  were  preserved,  and  whether  anything  similar  to  the  explan- 
atory report  in  Virginia  took  place,  are  points  upon  which  I  have 
no  information.  If  there  be  any  contemporary  evidence  ex- 
planatory of  the  Virginia  resolutions  beyond  the  documents  re- 
ferred to  in  the  letter  of  August,  1830,  to  Mr.  Everett,  it  is  not 
within  my  present  recollection.  It  may  doubtless  exist  in  pam- 
phlets or  newspapers  not  yet  met  Avith,  and  still  more  in  private 
letters  not  yet  brought  to  light. 

I  have  noticed,  in  a  paper  headed  "  Nullification  Theory,'' 
published  in  the  Richmond  Enquirer  of  the  20th  of  September, 
views  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  opinions,  which  may  perhaps  throw 
light  on  the  object  of  your  letter. 

I  will  add  nothing  to  these  hasty  remarks,  (excuse  the  pen- 
manship of  them,  of  which  my  rheumatic  fingers  refuse  to  give 
a  fairer  copy,)  but  a  hope  that  the  fermentation  in  which  the 
nullifying  doctrine  had  its  origin  will  yield  to  moderate  coun- 
sels in  the  Federal  Government ;  and  that  the  shining  talents 
and  patriotic  zeal  which  have  espoused  the  heresy  will  be  turned 
to  objects  more  worthy  of  both. 

With  friendly  salutations, 


TO   DR.   J.   W.   FRANCIS. 

MONTPELLIEH,  NoV  7,   1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  thank  you  for  the  pleasure  afforded  by  your 
interesting  address  to  the  Philolexican  Society  of  Columbian 
College,  forwarded  with  your  letter  of  the  25th  ultimo. 

The  friendly  relations  in  which  I  stood  to  both  Chancellor 
Livingston  and  Mr.  Monroe  would  make  me  a  reluctant  wit- 
ness, if  I  had  happened  to  possess  any  knowledge  of  facts  fa- 
voring either  at  the  expense  of  the  other  in  the  negotiations 
which  preceded  the  transfer  of  Louisiana  to  the  United  States. 
But  my  recollections  throw  no  light  on  the  subject  beyond  what 
may  be  derived  from  official  papers  in  print,  or  on  the  files  of 


1831.  LETTERS.  201 

the  Department  of  State,  and  especially  from  the  work  on  Lou- 
isiana by  Mr.  Marbois,  the  French  negotiator.  I  have  no 
doubt  that  each  of  the  envoys  did  everything,  according  to  his 
opportunities,  that  could  evince  official  zeal  and  anxious  pa- 
triotism; at  the  same  time  that  the  disclosures  of  Mr.  Marbois 
sufficiently  shew  that  the  real  cause  of  success  is  to  be  found  in 
the  sudden  policy  suggested  to  Napoleon  by  the  foreseen  rupture 
of  the  peace  of  Amiens,  and,  as  a  consequence,  the  seizure  of 
Louisiana  by  G.  Britain,  who  would  not  only  deprive  France 
of  her  acquisition,  but  turn  it,  politically  or  commercially, 
against  her,  in  relation  to  the  United  States  or  Spanish  Amer- 
ica. 

The  present  state  of  my  health,  crippled  by  severe  and  obsti- 
nate rheumatism,  combined  with  my  great  age,  oblige  me  to 
shrink  from  the  task  of  revising  the  political  statements  in  your 
pamphlet,  which,  under  other  circumstances,  would  be  underta- 
ken Avith  pleasure,  as  a  proof  of  my  respect  for  your  wishes.  It 
is  of  the  less  importance,  as,  in  the  event  of  your  recurring  to  the 
subject  of  your  address,  you  will  doubtless  be  able  to  consult 
whatever  sources  of  information  may  be  necessary  to  correct 
errors  into  which  a  slight  examination  preparatory  to  the  ad- 
dress may  have  betrayed  you. 


TO   JARED    SPARKS. 

Montpellier,  November  25,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  favor  of  the  14th  instant. 
The  simple  question  is,  whether  the  draught  sent  by  Mr.  Pinck- 
ney  to  Mr.  Adams,  and  printed  in  the  Journal  of  the  Convention, 
could  be  the  same  with  that  presented  by  him  to  the  Convention 
on  the  29  th  day  of  May,  1787;  and  I  regret  to  say  that  the  evidence 
that  that  was  not  the  case  is  irresistible.  Take,  as  a  sufficient 
example,  the  important  article  constituting  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, which,  in  the  draught  sent  to  Mr.  Adams,  besides 
being  too  minute  in  its  details  to  be  a  possible  anticipation  of 
the  result  of  the  discussion,  &c,  of  the  Convention  on  that  sub- 


202  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

ject,  makes  the  House  of  Representatives  the  cJioice  of  the  peo- 
ple. Now,  the  known  opinion  of  Mr.  Pinckney  was,  that  that 
branch  of  Congress  ought  to  be  chosen  by  the  State  Legislatures, 
and  not  immediately  by  the  people.  Accordingly,  on  the  6th 
day  of  June,  not  many  days  after  presenting  his  draught,  Mr. 
Pinckney,  agreeably  to  previous  notice,  moved  that,  as  an  amend- 
ment to  the  Resolution  of  Mr.  Randolph,  the  term  "  people  " 
should  be  struck  out  and  the  word  "Legislatures  "  inserted;  so 
as  to  read,  "  Resolved,  That  the  members  of  the  first  branch  of 
the  National  Legislature  ought  to  be  elected  by  the  Legislatures 
of  the  several  States."  But  what  decides  the  point  is  the  fol- 
lowing extract  from  him  to  me,  dated  March  28,  1789 : 

"Are  you  not,  to  use  a  full  expression,  abundantly  convinced 
that  the  theoretic  nonsense  of  an  election  of  the  members  of 
Congress  by  the  people,  in  the  first  instance,  is  clearly  and  prac- 
tically wrong;  that  it  will,  in  the  end,  be  the  means  of  bringing 
our  Councils  into  contempt,  and  that  the  Legislatures  are  the 
only  proper  judges  of  who  ought  to  be  elected?" 

Others  proofs  against  the  identity  of  the  two  draughts  may 
be  found  in  Article  VIII  of  the  Draught,  which,  whilst  it  speci- 
fies the  functions  of  the  President,  contains  no  provision  for  the 
election  of  an  such  officer,  nor,  indeed,  for  the  appointment  of 
any  Executive  Magistracy,  notwithstanding  the  evident  purpose 
of  the  author  to  provide  an  entire  plan  of  a  Federal  Government. 

Again,  in  several  instances  where  the  Draught  corresponds 
with  the  Constitution,  it  is  at  variance  with  the  ideas  of  Mr. 
Pinckney,  as  decidedly  expressed  in  his  votes  on  the  Journal  of 
the  Convention.  Thus,  in  Article  VIII  of  the  Draught,  pro- 
vision is  made  for  removing  the  President  by  impeachment, 
when  it  appears  that  in  the  Convention,  July  20,  he  was  op- 
posed to  any  impeachability  of  the  Executive  Magistrate.  In 
Article  III,  it  is  required  that  all  money-bills  shall  originate  in 
the  first  branch  of  the  Legislature;  and  yet  he  voted,  on  the 
8th  August,  for  striking  out  that  provision  in  the  Draught  re- 
ported by  the  Committee  on  the  6th.  In  Article  V,  members 
of  each  House  are  made  ineligible,  as  well  as  incapable,  of  hold- 
ing any  office  under  the  Union,  &c,  as  was  the  case  at  one  stage 


1831.  LETTERS.  203 

of  the  Constitution;  a  disqualification  disapproved  and  opposed 
by  him  August  14th. 

Further  discrepancies  might  be  found  in  the  observations  of 
Mr.  Pinckney,  printed  in  a  pamphlet  by  Francis  Childs,  in  New 
York,  shortly  after  the  close  of  the  Convention.  I  have  a  copy, 
too  mutilated  for  use,  but  it  may  probably  be  preserved  in  some 
of  your  historical  respositorics. 

It  is  probable  that  in  some  instances,  where  the  Committee 
which  reported  the  Draught  of  Aug'  6th  might  be  supposed  to 
have  borrowed  from  Mr.  Pinckney's  Draught,  they  followed  de- 
tails previously  settled  by  the  Convention,  and  ascertainable, 
perhaps,  by  the  Journal.  Still  there  may  have  been  room  for  a 
passing  respect  for  Mr.  Pinckney's  plan  by  adopting,  in  some 
cases,  his  arrangement;  in  others,  his  language.  A  certain  anal- 
ogy of  outlines  may  be  well  accounted  for.  All  who  regard 
the  object  of  the  Convention  to  be  a  real  and  regular  Govern- 
ment, as  contradistinguished  from  the  old  Federal  system,  looked 
to  a  division  of  it  into  Legislative,  Executive,  and  Judiciary 
branches,  and  of  course  would  accommodate  their  plans  to  their 
organization.  This  was  the  view  of  the  subject  generally  taken 
and  familiar  in  conversation,  when  Mr.  Pinckney  was  preparing 
his  plan.  I  lodged  in  the  same  house  with  him,  and  he  was  fond 
of  conversing  on  the  subject.  As  you  will  have  less  occasion 
than  you  expected  to  speak  of  the  Convention  of  1787,  may  it 
not  be  best  to  say  nothing  of  this  delicate  topic  relating  to  Mr. 
Pinckney,  on  which  you  cannot  use  all  the  lights  that  exist  and 
that  may  be  added? 

My  letter  of  April  8th  was  meant  merely  for  your  own  in- 
formation and  to  have  its  effect  on  your  own  view  of  things. 
I  see  nothing  in  it,  however,  unfit  for  the  press,  unless  it  be 
thought  that  the  friends  of  Mr.  Morris  will  not  consider  the 
credit  given  him  a  balance  for  the  merit  withdrawn,  and  ascribe 
the  latter  to  some  prejudice  on  my  part. 


204  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 


TO     N.   P.   TRIST. 

Decemreu,  1831. 

I  return,  with  my  thanks,  the  printed  speech  of  Col.  Hayne 
on  the  4th  of  July  last.  It  is  blotted  with  many  strange  errors, 
some  of  a  kind  not  to  have  been  looked  for  from  a  mind  like 
that  of  the  author.  I  cannot  see  the  advantage  of  this  perse- 
verance of  South  Carolina  in  claiming  the  authority  of  the  Vir- 
ginia proceedings  in  1798-99,  as  asserting  a  right  in  a  single 
State  to  nullify  an  act  of  the  United  States.  Where,  indeed,  is 
the  fairness  of  attempting  to  palm  on  Virginia  an  intention 
which  is  contradicted  by  such  a  variety  of  contemporary  proofs; 
which  has,  at  no  intervening  period,  received  the  slightest  coun- 
tenance from  her;  and  which,  with  one  voice,  she  now  disclaims? 
There  is  the  less  propriety  in  this  singular  effort,  since  Virginia, 
if  she  could,  as  is  implied,  disown  a  doctrine  which  was  her  own 
offspring,  would  be  a  bad  authority  to  lean  on  in  any  cause. 
Nor  is  the  imprudence  less  than  the  impropriety,  of  an  appeal 
from  the  present  to  a  former  period,  as  from  a  degenerate  to  a 
purer  state  of  political  orthodoxy;  since  South  Carolina,  to  be 
consistent,  would  be  obliged  to  surrender  her  present  nullifying 
notions  to  her  own  higher  authority,  when  she  declined  to  con- 
cur and  co-operate  with  Virginia  at  the  period  of  the  alien  and 
sedition  laws.  It  would  be  needless  to  dwell  on  the  contrast 
of  her  present  nullifying  doctrines  with  those  maintained  by  her 
political  champions  at  subsequent  and  not  very  remote  dates. 

Besides  the  external  and  other  internal  evidence  that  the  pro- 
ceedings of  Virginia,  occasioned  by  the  alien  and  sedition  laws, 
do  not  maintain  the  right  of  a  single  State,  as  a  party  to  the 
Constitution,  to  arrest  the  execution  of  a  law  of  the  United 
States,  it  seems  to  have  been  overlooked,  that  in  every  instance 
in  those  proceedings  where  the  ultimate  right  of  the  States  to 
interpose  is  alluded  to,  the  plural  term  States  has  been  used; 
the  term  State,  as  a  single  party,  being  invariably  avoided.  And 
if  it  had  been  suspected  that  the  term  respective,  in  the  third  res- 
olution, would  have  been  misconstrued  into  such  a  claim  of  an 
individual  State,  or  that  the  language  of  the  seventh  resolution, 


1831.  LETTERS.  205 

invoking  the  co-operation  of  the  other  States  with  Virginia, 
would  not  be  a  security  against  the  error,  a  more  explicit  guard 
would  doubtless  have  been  introduced.  But  surely  there  is 
nothing  strange  in  a  concurrence  and  co-operation  of  many  par- 
ties in  maintaining  the  rights  of  each  within  itself. 

It  would  seem,  also,  to  be  deemed  an  object  of  importance  to 
fix  the  charge  of  inconsistency  on  me  individually,  in  relation  to 
the  proceedings  of  Virginia  in  1798-'99.  But  it  happens  that 
the  ground  of  the  charge  particularly  relied  on  would,  at  the 
same  time,  exhibit  the  State  in  direct  and  pointed  opposition  to 
a  nullifying  import  of  those  proceedings. 

In  the  seventh  resolution,  which  declares  the  alien  and  se- 
dition laws  to  be  "  unconstitutional,"  this  term  was  followed  by 
"  null,  void,  and  of  no  effect,"  which,  it  is  alleged,  express  an 
actual  nullification;  and  as  they  are  ascribed  to  me  as  the  drawer 
of  the  resolution,  it  is  inferred  that  I  must  then  have  been  a 
nullifier,  though  now  disclaiming  the  character.  These  partic- 
ular words,  though  essentially  the  same  with  unconstitutional, 
were  promptly  and  unanimously  stricken  out  by  the  House  as  a 
caution  against  misconstruction.  Now,  admitting  that  they 
were  in  the  original  draught  of  the  resolution,  and  assuming 
that  they  meant  more  than  the  term  unconstitutional,  amount- 
ing even  to  nullification,  the  striking  them  out  turns  the  author- 
ity of  the  State  precisely  against  the  doctrine  for  which  that 
authority  is  claimed. 

Other,  and  some  not  very  candid,  attempts  are  made  to  stamp 
my  political  career  with  discrediting  inconsistencies.  One  of 
these  is  a  charge  that  I  have  on  some  occasions  represented  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  as  the  judge,  in  the  last 
resort,  on  the  boundary  of  jurisdiction  between  the  several 
States  and  the  United  States,  and  on  other  occasions  have  as- 
signed this  last  resort  to  the  parties  to  the  Constitution.  It  is 
the  more  extraordinary  that  such  a  charge  should  have  been 
hazarded,  since,  besides  the  obvious  explanation  that  the  last 
resort  means,  in  one  case,  the  last  within  the  purview  and  forms 
of  the  Constitution,  and,  in  the  other,  the  last  resort  of  all,  from 
the  Constitution  itself  to  the  parties  who  made  it,  the  distinc- 


206  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

tion  is  presented  and  dwelt  on  both  in  the  report  on  the  Vir- 
ginia resolutions  and  in  the  letter  to  Mr.  Everett,  the  very  doc- 
uments appealed  to  in  proof  of  the  inconsistency..  The  distinc- 
tion between  these  ultimate  resorts  is,  in  fact,  the  same  within 
the  several  States.  The  judiciary  there  may,  in  the  course  of 
its  functions,  be  the  last  resort  within  the  provisions  and  forms 
of  the  Constitution,  and  the  people,  the  parties  to  the  Constitu- 
tion, the  last  in  cases  ultra-constitutional,  and  therefore  requir- 
ing their  interposition. 

It  will  not  escape  notice,  that  the  judicial  authority  of  the 
United  States,  when  overriding  that  of  a  State,  is  complained 
of  as  subjecting  a  sovereign  State,  with  all  its  rights  and  du- 
ties, to  the  will  of  a  court  composed  of  not  more  than  seven  in- 
dividuals. This  is  far  from  a  true  state  of  the  case.  The  ques- 
tion would  be  between  a  single  State  and  the  authority  of  a 
tribunal  representing  as  many  States  as  compose  the  Union. 

Another  circumstance  to  be  noted  is,  that  the  nullifiers,  in 
stating  their  doctrine,  omit  the  particular  form  in  which  it  is  to 
be  carried  into  execution;  thereby  confounding  it  with  the  ex- 
treme cases  of  oppression  which  justify  a  resort  to  the  original 
right  of  resistence,  a  right  belonging  to  every  community,  un- 
der every  form  of  Government,  consolidated  as  well  as  federal. 
To  view  the  doctrine  in  its  true  character,  it  must  be  recol- 
lected that  it  asserts  a  right  in  a  single  State  to  stop  the  exe- 
cution of  a  federal  law,  although  in  effect  stopping  the  law 
everywhere,  until  a  Convention  of  the  States  could  be  brought 
about  by  a  process  requiring  an  uncertain  time;  and  finally,  in 
the  Convention,  when  formed,  a  vote  of  seven  States,  if  in  fa- 
vour of  the  veto,  to  give  it  a  prevalence  over  the  vast  majority 
of  seventeen  States.  For  this  preposterous  and  anarchical  pre- 
tension there  is  not  a  shadow  of  countenance  in  the  Constitu- 
tion; and  well  that  there  is  not,  for  it  is  certain  that,  with  such 
a  deadly  poison  in  it,  no  constitution  could  be  sure  of  lasting  a 
year;  there  having  scarcely  been  a  year  since  ours  was  formed 
without  a  discontent  in  some  one  or  other  of  the  States,  which 
might  have  availed  itself  of  the  nullifying  prerogative.  Yet 
this  has  boldly  sought  a  sanction  under  the  name  of  Mr.  Jeffer 


1831.  LETTERS. 


207 


son,  because,  in  his  letter  to  Major  Cartwright,  he  held  out  a 
Convention  of  the  States,  as,  with  us,  a  peaceable  remedy,  in 
cases  to  be  decided  in  Europe  by  intestine  wars.  Who  can  be- 
lieve that  Mr.  Jefferson  referred  to  a  Convention  summoned  at 
the  pleasure  of  a  single  State,  with  an  interregnum  during  its 
deliberations;  and,  above  all,  with  a  rule  of  decision  subjecting 
nearly  three-fourths  to  one-fourth?  No  man's  creed  was  more 
opposed  to  such  an  inversion  of  the  republican  order  of  things. 

There  can  be  no  objection  to  the  reference  made  to  the  weak- 
ening effect  of  age  on  the  judgment,  in  accounting  for  changes 
of  opinion.  But  inconsistency,  at  least,  may  be  charged  on 
those  who  lay  such  stress  on  the  effect  of  age  in  one  case,  and 
place  such  peculiar  confidence  where  that  ground  of  distrust 
would  be  so  much  stronger.  What  was  the  comparative  age 
of  Mr.  Jefferson,  when  he  wrote  the  letter  to  Mr.  Giles,  a  few 
months  before  his  death,  in  which  his  language,  though  admit- 
ting a  construction  not  irreconcilable  with  his  former  opinions, 
is  held,  in  its  assumed  meaning,  to  outweigh,  on  the  tariff  ques- 
tion, opinions  deliberately  formed  in  the  vigour  of  life,  reitera- 
ted in  official  reasonings  and  reports,  and  deriving  the  most  co- 
gent sanction  from  his  presidential  messages  and  private  cor- 
respondences? What,  again,  the  age  of  General  Sumter,  at 
which  the  concurrence  of  his  opinion  is  so  triumphantly  hailed? 
That  his  judgment  may  be  as  sound  as  his  services  have  been 
splendid,  may  be  admitted;  but,  had  his  opinion  been  the  re- 
verse of  what  it  proved  to  be,  the  question  is  justified  by  the 
distrust  of  opinions,  at  an  age  very  far  short  of  his,  whether  his 
venerable  years  would  have  escaped  a  different  use  of  them. 

But  I  find  that,  by  a  sweeping  charge,  my  inconsistency  is 
extended  "  to  my  opinions  on  almost  every  important  question 
which  has  divided  the  public  into  parties."  In  supporting  this 
charge,  an  appeal  is  made  to  "  Yates's  Secret  Debates  in  the 
Federal  Convention  of  1787,"  as  proving  that  I  originally  en- 
tertained opinions  adverse  to  the  rights  of  the  States;  and  to 
the  writings  of  Col.  Taylor,  of  Caroline,  as  proving  that  I  was 
in  that  Convention  "  an  advocate  for  a  consolidated  national 
Government." 


208  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 

Of  tlio  debates,  it  is  certain  that  they  abound  in  errors,  some 
of  them  very  material  in  relation  to  myself.  Of  the  passages 
quoted,  it  may  be  remarked,  that  tlicy  do  not  warrant  tlie  infer- 
ence drawn  from  them.  They  import  "that  I  was  disposed  to 
give  Congress  a  power  to  repeal  State  laws,"  and  "  that  the 
States  ought  to  be  placed  under  the  control  of  the  General  Gov- 
ernment, at  least  as  much  as  they  were  formerly,  when  under  the 
British  King  and  Parliament." 

The  obvious  necessity  of  a  control  on  the  laws  of  the  States, 
so  far  as  they  might  violate  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the 
United  States,  left  no  option  but  as  to  (lie  mode.  The  modes 
presenting  themselves  were:  1.  A  veto  on  the  passage  of  the 
State  laws.  2.  A  congressional  repeal  of  them.  3.  A.  judicial 
annulment  of  them.  The  first,  though  extensively  favoured  at 
the  outset,  was  found,  on  discussion,  liable  to  insuperable  ob- 
jections, arising  from  the  extent  of  country  and  the  multiplicity 
of  State  laws.  The  second  was  not  free  from  such  as  gave  a 
preference  to  the  third,  as  now  provided  by  the  Constitution. 
The  opinion  that  the  States  ought  to  be  placed  not  less  under 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  than  they  were  under  that 
of  Great  Britain,  can  provoke  no  censure  from  those  who  ap- 
prove the  Constitution  as  it  stands,  with  powers  exceeding  those 
ever  allowed  by  the  colonies  to  Great  Britain,  particularly  the 
vital  power  of  taxation,  which  is  so  indefinitely  vested  in  Con- 
gress, and  to  the  claim  of  which  by  Great  Britain  a  bloody  war 
and  final  separation  were  preferred. 

The  author  of  the  "Secret  Debates,"  though  highly  respecta- 
ble in  his  general  character,  was  the  representative  of  the  por- 
tion of  the  State  of  New  York  which  was  strenuously  opposed 
to  the  object  of  the  Convention,  and  was  himself  a  zealous  par- 
tisan. His  notes  carry  on  their  face  proofs  that  they  were 
taken  in  a  very  desultory  manner,  by  which  parts  of  sentences, 
explaining  or  qualifying  other  parts,  might  often  escape  the 
ear.  He  left  the  Convention,  also,  on  the  5th  of  July,  before 
it  had  reached  the  midway  of  its  session,  and  before  the  opin- 
ions of  the  members  were  fully  developed  into  their  matured 
and  practical  shapes.     Nor  did  he  conceal  the  feelings  of  dis- 


1831.  LETTERS.  209 

content  and  disgust  which  he  carried  away  with  him.  These 
considerations  may  account  for  errors,  some  of  which  are  self- 
condemned.  Who  can  believe  that  so  crude  and  untenable  a 
statement  could  have  been  intentionally  made  on  the  floor  of 
the  Convention,  as  "  that  the  several  States  were  political  so- 
cieties, varying  from  the  lowest  corporations  to  the  highest  sov- 
ereigns,11 or  "that  the  States  had  vested  all  the  essential  rights 
of  Government  in  the  old  Congress?" 

On  recurring  to  the  writings  of  Col.  Taylor,*  it  will  be  seen 
that  he  founds  his  imputation  against  myself  and  Governor 
Randolph,  of  favouring  a  consolidated  national  Government, 
on  the  resolutions  introduced  into  the  Convention  by  the  latter 
in  behalf  of  the  Virginia  delegates,  from  a  consultation  among 
whom  they  were  the  result.  The  resolutions  imported  that  a 
Government,  consisting  of  a  national  Legislature,  Executive, 
and  Judiciary,  ought  to  be  substituted  for  the  existing  Con- 
gress. Assuming  for  the  term  national  a  meaning  co-extensive 
with  a  single  consolidated  Government,  he  filled  a  number  of 
pages  in  deriving  from  that  source  a  support  of  his  imputation. 
The  whole  course  of  proceedings  on  those  resolutions  ought  to 
have  satisfied  him  that  the  term  national,  as  contradistinguished 
ivom.  federal,  was  not  meant  to  express  more  than  that  the  pow- 
ers to  be  vested  in  the  new  Government  were  to  operate  as  in 
a  national  Government,  directly  on  the  people,  and  not,  as  in 
the  old  Confederacy,  on  the  States  only.  The  extent  of  the 
powers  to  be  vested,  also,  though  expressed  in  loose  terms,  evi- 
dently had  reference  to  limitations  and  definitions  to  be  made  in 
the  progress  of  the  work,  distinguishing  it  from  a  plenary  and 
consolidated  Government. 

It  ought  to  have  occurred,  that  the  Government  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  being  a  novelty  and  a  compound,  had  no  technical 
terms  or  phrases  appropriate  to  it,  and  that  old  terms  were  to 
be  used  in  new  senses,  explained  by  the  context  or  by  the  facts 
of  the  case. 

Some  exulting  inferences  have  been  drawn  from  the  change 

*  See  <;  New  Views,"  written  after  the  journal  of  convention  was  printed. 
VOL.  IV.  14 


210 


WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 


noted  in  the  journal  of  the  Convention  of  the  word  national  into 
"United  States."  The  change  may  be  accounted  for  by  a  de- 
sire to  avoid  a  misconception  of  the  former,  the  latter  being 
preferred  as  a  familiar  caption.  That  the  change  could  have 
no  effect  on  the  real  character  of  the  Government  was  and  is 
obvious;  this  being  necessarily  deduced  from  the  actual  struc- 
ture of  the  Government  and  the  quantum  of  its  powers. 

The  general  charge  which  the  zeal  of  party  has  brought 
against  me,  "of  a  change  of  opinion  in  almost  every  important 
question  which  has  divided  parties  in  this  country,"  has  not  a 
little  surprised  me.  For,  although  far  from  regarding  a  cliange 
of  opinion  under  the  lights  of  experience  and  the  results  of  im- 
proved reflection  as  exposed  to  censure,  and  still  farther  from 
the  vanity  of  supposing  myself  less  in  need  than  others  of  that 
privilege,  I  had  indulged  the  belief  that  there  were  few  if  any 
of  my  contemporaries,  through  the  long  period  and  varied  ser- 
vices of  my  political  life,  to  whom  a  mutability  of  opinion  on 
great  constitutional  questions  was  less  applicable. 

Beginning  with  the  great  question  growing  out  of  the  terms 
"common  defence  and  general  welfare,"  my  early  opinion  ex- 
pressed in  the  Federalist,  limiting  the  phrase  to  the  specified 
powers,  has  been  adhered  to  on  every  occasion  which  has  called 
for  a  test  of  it. 

As  to  the  power  in  relation  to  roads  and  canals,  my  opinion, 
without  any  previous  variance  from  it,  was  formally  announced 
in  the  veto  on  the  Bonus  bill  in  1817,  and  no  proof  of  a  subse- 
quent change  has  been  given. 

On  the  subject  of  the  tariff  for  the  encouragement  of  manu- 
factures, my  opinion  in  favour  of  its  constitutionality  has  been 
invariable  from  the  first  session  of  Congress  under  the  new  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States,  to  the  explicit  and  public  main- 
tenance of  it  in  my  letters  to  Mr.  Cabell  in  1828. 

It  will  not  be  contended  that  any  change  has  been  manifested 
in  my  opinion  of  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  alien  and  sedition 

laws. 

With  respect  to  the  supremacy  of  the  judicial  power,  on  ques- 
tions occurring  in  the  course  of  its  functions,  concerning  the 


1831.  LETTERS.  211 

boundary  of  jurisdiction  between  the  United  States  and  indi- 
vidual States,  my  opinion  in  favour  of  it  was,  as  the  forty-first 
number  of  the  Federalist  shows,  of  the  earliest  date;  and  I  have 
never  ceased  to  think  that  this  supremacy  was  a  vital  principle 
of  the  Constitution,  as  it  is  a  prominent  feature  in  its  text.  A 
supremacy  of  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  Union,  without 
a  supremacy  in  the  exposition  and  execution  of  them,  would  be 
as  much  a  mockery  as  a  scabbard  put  into  the  hand  of  a  soldier 
without  a  sword  in  it.  I  have  never  been  able  to  see,  that, 
without  such  a  view  of  the  subject,  the  Constitution  itself  could 
be  the  supreme  law  of  the  land;  or  that  the  uniformity  of  the 
federal  authority  throughout  the  parties  to  it  could  be  pre- 
served; or  that  without  this  uniformity,  anarchy  and  disunion 
could  be  prevented. 

On  the  subject  of  the  bank  alone  is  there  a  colour  for  the 
charge  of  mutability  on  a  constitutional  question.  But  here 
the  inconsistency  is  apparent,  not  real,  since  the  change  was  in 
conformity  to  an  early  and  unchanged  opinion,  that,  in  the  case 
of  a  Constitution  as  of  a  law,  a  course  of  authoritative,  deliber- 
ate, and  continued  decisions,  such  as  the  bank  could  plead,  was 
an  evidence  of  the  public  judgment,  necessarily  superseding  in- 
dividual opinions.  There  has  been  a  fallacy  in  this  case,  as, 
indeed,  in  others,  in  confounding  a  question  whether  precedents 
could  expound  a  Constitution,  with  a  question  whether  they 
could  alter  a  Constitution.  This  distinction  is  too  obvious  to 
need  elucidation.  None  will  deny  that  precedents  of  a  certain 
description  fix  the  interpretation  of  a  law.  Yet  who  will  pre- 
tend that  they  can  repeal  or  alter  a  law  ? 

Another  error  has  been  in  ascribing  to  the  intention  of  the 
Convention  which  formed  the  Constitution,  an  undue  ascendency 
in  expounding  it.  Apart  from  the  difficulty  of  verifying  that 
intention,  it  is  clear,  that  if  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution  is 
to  be  sought  out  of  itself,  it  is  not  in  the  proceedings  of  the 
body  that  proposed  it,  but  in  those  of  the  State  Conventions, 
which  gave  it  all  the  validity  and  authority  it  possesses. 


212  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1831. 


TO   N.   P.   TRIST. 

December  21,  1831. 

DR  Sir, — I  return  the  newspapers.  The  passage  is  a  sad  ex- 
ample of  pulpit  authenticity,  justice,  and  delicacy.  In  what  re- 
lates to  me  there  is  scarce  any  part  wholly  true  in  the  sense 
intended.  How  such  a  string  of  misinformation  could  have 
been  gathered,  it  is  not  easy  to  imagine.  I  never  studied  law 
with  Mr.  Jefferson.  The  story  about  my  father's  interference, 
and  my  evasion  of  his  anxious  inquiries,  falls  of  course.  That 
of  my  studying  the  Bible  on  the  Sabbath  during  the  first  term, 
and  abandoning  it  during  the  second  term  of  my  service  in  the 
Department  of  State,  is,  throughout,  a  sheer  fabrication  for  the 
sake  of  the  sting  put  into  the  tail  of  it. 

The  preacher  says  he  had  spoken  to  me  on  the  subject  of  my 
faith,  and  that  I  always  evaded  his  object.  I  recollect  one  per- 
son, only,  of  his  name  [Wilson]  who  could  have  made  the  allu- 
sion. He  was  presented  to  me  at  Washington  by  Mr.  Piper, 
and  perhaps  other  Pennsylvania  members  of  Congress,  and 
called  on  me  several  times  afterwards  late  in  the  evening.  He 
was  considered  a  man  of  superior  genius,  and  a  profound  erudi- 
tion, for  his  years,  but  eccentric,  and  subject  occasionally  to 
flights  into  the  region  of  mental  derangement,  of  which,  it  was 
said,  he  gave  proofs  in  a  sermon  preached  in  Washington.  This 
infirmity  betrayed  itself  during  a  visit  to  me  with  Mr.  Piper, 
who  apologized  for  it.  In  intervals  perfectly  lucid,  his  con- 
versation was  interesting. 


TO   R.   R.    GURLEY. 

Montpellier,  Decr  28,  1831. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  in  due  time  your  letter  of  the  21  ultimo, 
and  with  due  sensibility  to  the  subject  of  it.  Such,  however, 
has  been  the  effect  of  a  painful  rheumatism  on  my  general  con- 
dition, as  well  as  in  disqualifying  my  fingers  for  the  use  of  the 
pen,  that  I  could  not  do  justice  "  to  the  principles  and  measures 


iS31.  LETTERS.  213 

of  the  Colonization  Society,  in  all  the  great  and  various  rela- 
tions they  sustain  to  our  own  country  and  to  Africa."  If  my 
views  of  them  could  have  the  value  which  your  partiality  sup- 
poses, I  may  observe,  in  brief,  that  the  Society  had  always  my 
good  wishes,  though  with  hopes  of  its  success  less  sanguine  than 
were  entertained  by  others  found  to  have  been  the  better  judges; 
and  that  I  feel  the  greatest  pleasure  at  the  progress  already 
made  by  the  Society,  and  the  encouragement  to  encounter  the 
remaining  difficulties  afforded  by  the  earlier  and  greater  ones 
already  overcome.  Man}T  circumstances  at  the  present  moment 
seem  to  concur  in  brightening  the  prospects  of  the  Society,  and 
cherishing  the  hope  that  the  time  will  come  when  the  dreadful 
calamity  which  has  so  long  afflicted  our  country,  and  filled  so 
many  with  despair,  will  be  gradually  removed,  and  by  means 
consistent  tvith  justice,  peace,  and  the  general  satisfaction  ;  thus 
giving  to  our  country  the  full  enjoyment  of  the  blessings  of  lib- 
erty, and  to  the  world  the  full  benefit  of  its  great  example.  I 
have  never  considered  the  main  difficulty  of  the  great  work  as 
lying  in  the  deficiency  of  emancipations,  but  in  an  inadequacy 
of  asylums  for  such  a  growing  mass  of  population,  and  in  the 
great  expense  of  removing  it  to  its  new  home.  The  spirit  of 
private  manumission,  as  the  laws  may  permit  and  the  exiles  may 
consent,  is  increasing,  and  will  increase,  and  there  are  sufficient 
indications  that  the  public  authorities  in  slaveholding  States 
are  looking  forward  to  interpositions,  in  different  forms,  that 
must  have  a  powerful  effect. 

With  respect  to  the  new  abode  for  the  emigrants,  all  agree 
that  the  choice  made  by  the  Society  is  rendered  peculiarly  ap- 
propriate by  considerations  which  need  not  be  repeated,  and  if 
other  situations  should  not  be  found  as  eligible  receptacles  for 
a  portion  of  them,  the  prospect  in  Africa  seems  to  be  expanding 
in  a  highly  encouraging  degree. 

In  contemplating  the  pecuniary  resources  needed  for  the  re. 
moval  of  such  a  number  to  so  great  a  distance,  my  thoughts  and 
hopes  have  long  been  turned  to  the  rich  fund  presented  in  the 
western  lands  of  the  nation,  which  will  soon  entirely  cease  to  be 
under  a  pledge  for  another  object.     The  great  one  in  question 


214  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

is  truly  of  a  national  character,  and  it  is  known  that  distin- 
guished patriots  not  dwelling  in  slaveholding  States  have 
viewed  the  object  in  that  light,  and  would  be  willing  to  let  the 
national  domain  be  a  resource  in  effectuating  it. 

Should  it  be  remarked  that  the  States,  though  all  may  be  in- 
terested in  relieving  our  country  from  the  coloured  population, 
are  not  equally  so,  it  is  but  fair  to  recollect  that  the  sections 
most  to  be  benefited  are  those  whose  cessions  created  the  fund 
to  be  disposed  of. 

I  am  aware  of  the  constitutional  obstacle  which  has  presented 
itself;  but  if  the  general  will  be  reconciled  to  an  application  of 
the  territorial  fund  to  the  removal  of  the  coloured  population, 
a  grant  to  Congress  of  the  necessary  authority  could  be  carried 
with  little  delay  through  the  forms  of  the  Constitution. 

Sincerely  wishing  increasing  success  to  the  labours  of  the 
Society,  I  pray  you  to  be  assured  of  my  esteem,  and  to  accept 
my  friendly  salutations. 


TO   J.   K.   PAULDING. 

Jaxuary— ,  1832. 

According  to  my  promise,  I  send  you  the  enclosed  sketch.  It 
was  my  purpose  to  have  enlarged  some  parts  of  it,  and  to  have 
revised  and  probably  blotted  out  others.  But  the  crippled  state 
of  my  health  makes  me  shun  the  task,  and  the  uncertainties  of 
the  future  induce  me  to  commit  the  paper,  crude  as  it  is,  to  your 
friendly  discretion.  Wishing  to  know  that  it  has  not  miscar- 
ried, drop  a  single  line  saying  so. 


TO   JAMES   T.    AUSTIN, 

Montpellier,  Febr  6,  1832. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  19th  ultimo  re- 
questing a  "  communication  of  any  facts  connected  with  the 
service  of  the  late  Vice  President  Gerry  in  the  Convention  of 
1787."    The  letter  was  retarded  by  its  address  to  Charlottes- 


1832.  LETTERS.  215 

villc  instead  of  Orange  Court  House.  It  would  give  me  pleas- 
ure to  make  any  useful  contribution  to  a  biography  of  Mr. 
Gerry,  for  whom  I  had  a  very  high  esteem  and  a  very  warm  re- 
gard. But  I  know  not  that  I  could  furnish  any  particular  facts 
of  that  character,  separable  from  his  general  course  in  the  Con- 
vention, especially  without  some  indicating  reference  to  them. 
I  may  say,  in  general,  that  Mr.  Gerry  was  an  active,  an  able, 
and  interesting  member  of  that  Assembly,  and  that  the  part  he 
bore  in  its  discussions  and  proceedings  was  important  and  con- 
tinued to  the  close  of  them.  The  grounds  on  which  he  dissented 
from  some  of  the  results  are  well  known. 

I  shall,  I  am  sure,  sir,  be  pardoned  any  deficiency  in  this  an- 
swer to  your  request,  when  I  remark  that  I  am  now  approach- 
ing the  82d  year  of  my  age,  and  that  besides  the  infirmities  inci- 
dent to  it,  I  have  for  a  considerable  time  been  suffering  from  a 
severe  rheumatism,  which,  among  its  diffusive  effects,  has  so 
crippled  my  hands  and  fingers  that  I  write  my  name  with  pain 
and  difficulty,  and  am  in  a  manner  disqualified  for  researches 
which  require  the  handling  of  papers. 

Wishing  you,  sir,  success  in  acquiring  the  means  of  doing  full 
justice  to  the  merits  of  a  distinguished  Revolutionary  patriot, 
I  pray  you  to  accept  assurances  of  my  esteem  and  cordial  re- 
spects. 


TO   E.    D.    WHITE,    OF    LOUISIANA,   M.    C. 

J.  M.  presents  the  thanks  due  for  the  remarks  upon  a  plan 
for  the  total  abolition  of  "  slavery  in  the  United  States  "  with 
which  he  has  been  favoured. 

The  views  taken  of  the  subject  are  very  interesting;  but  an 
error  is  noticed  in  ascribing  to  him  "  the  opinion  that  Congress 
possesses  constitutional  powers  to  appropriate  public  funds  to 
aid  this  redeeming  project  of  colonizing  the  coloured  people." 
He  wished  the  powers  of  Congress  to  be  enlarged  on  this 
subject. 

Montpellier,  14th  Feb.,  1832. 


216  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 


TO   A.   ROBBJNS. 

Montpellier,  March  21,  1832. 

J.  Madison  has  duly  received  the  speech  of  Mr.  Robbins  on 
the  "  Protection  of  American  Industry."  J.  Madison  lias  read 
it,  as  he  has  others,  taking  opposite  views  of  the  subject,  with 
a  just  sense  of  the  eloquence  and  ability  brought  forth  by  the 
discussion.  He  cannot  but  hope,  notwithstanding  the  antipode 
opinions  which  have  appeared,  that  some  intermediate  ground 
will  be  traced,  for  an  accommodation,  so  impressively  called  for 
by  patriotic  considerations.  With  his  thanks  to  Mr.  Robbins 
for  his  friendly  regards,  he  tenders  him  assurances  of  his  con- 
tinued esteem  and  good  wishes. 


TO   HENRY   CLAY. 
( Confidential.) 

Marcu  22,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  yours  of  the  17th.  Although 
you  kindly  release  me  from  a  reply,  it  may  be  proper  to  say  that 
some  of  the  circumstances  to  which  you  refer  were  not  before 
known  to  me. 

On  the  great  question  before  Congress,  on  the  decision  of 
which  so  much  depends  out  of  Congress,  I  ought  the  less  to  ob- 
trude an  opinion,  as  its  merits  essentially  depend  on  many  de- 
tails which  I  have  never  investigated,  and  of  which  I  am  an  in- 
competent judge.  I  know  only  that  the  tariff,  in  its  present 
amount  and  form,  is  a  source  of  deep  and  extensive  discontent, 
and  I  fear  that  without  alleviations  separating  the  more  mode- 
rate from  the  more  violent  opponents,  very  serious  effects  are 
threatened.  Of  these,  the  most  formidable  and  not  the  least 
probable  would  be  a  Southern  Convention;  the  avowed  object 
of  some,  and  the  unavowed  object  of  others,  whose  views  are, 
perhaps,  still  more  to  be  dreaded.  The  disastrous  consequences 
of  disunion,  obvious  to  all,  will,  no  doubt,  be  a  powerful  check 
on  its  partisans;  but  such  a  Convention,  characterized  as  it 


1832.  LETTERS.  217 

would  be  by  selected  talents,  ardent  zeal,  and  the  confidence  of 
those  represented,  would  not  be  easily  stopped  in  it3  career; 
especially  as  many  of  its  members,  though  not  carrying  with 
them  particular  aspirations  for  the  honours,  &c,  &c,  presented 
to  ambition  on  a  new  political  theatre,  would  find  them  germi- 
nating in  sucli  a  hot-bed. 

To  these  painful  ideas  I  can  only  oppose  hopes  and  wishes, 
that,  notwithstanding  the  wide  space  and  warm  feelings  which 
divide  the  parties,  some  accommodating  arrangements  may  be 
devised  that  will  prove  an  immediate  anodyne  and  involve  a 
lasting  remedy  to  the  tariff  discords. 

Mrs.  Madison  charges  me  with  her  affectionate  remembrances 
to  Mrs.  Clay,  to  whom  I  beg  to  be,  at  the  same  time,  respect- 
fully presented,  with  reassurances  of  my  high  esteem  and  cordial 
regards. 


TO   N.   P.   TRIST. 

Montpellier,  May — ,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  8th,  with  the 
book  referred  to,  and  dictate  the  acknowledgment  of  it  to  a  pen 
that  is  near  me.  I  will  read  the  work  as  soon  as  I  may  be  able. 
When  that  will  be  I  cannot  say.  I  have  been  confined  to  my 
bed  many  days  by  a  bilious  attack.  The  fever  is  now  leaving 
me,  but  in  a  very  enfeebled  state,  and  without  any  abatement 
of  my  rheumatism;  which,  besides  its  general  effect  on  my  health, 
still  cripples  me  in  my  limbs,  and  especially  in  my  hands  and 
fingers. 

I  am  glad  to  find  you  so  readily  deciding  that  the  charges 
against  Mr.  Jefferson  can  be  duly  refuted.  I  doubt  not  this  will 
be  well  done.  To  be  so,  it  will  be  expedient  to  review  care- 
fully the  correspondences  of  Mr.  Jefferson;  to  recur  to  the  as- 
pects of  things  at  different  epochs  of  the  Government,  particu- 
larly as  presented  at  its  outset,  in  the  unrepublican  formalities 
introduced  and  attempted,  not  by  President  Washington,  but 
by  the  vitiated  political  taste  of  others  taking  the  lead  on  the 


218  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

occasion,  and  again  in  the  proceedings  which  marked  the  Vice 
Presidency  of  Mr.  Jefferson. 

Allowances  also  ought  to  be  made  for  a  habit  in  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son, as  in  others  of  great  genius,  of  expressing  in  strong  and 
round  terms  impressions  of  the  moment. 

It  may  be  added,  that  a  full  exhibition  of  the  correspondences 
of  distinguished  public  men  through  the  varied  scenes  of  a  long 
period,  would,  without  a  sinyle  exception,  not  fail  to  involve 
delicate  personalities  and  apparent,  if  not  real,  inconsistencies. 

I  heartily  wish  that  something  may  be  done  with  the  tariff 
that  will  be  admissible  on  both  sides,  and  arrest  the  headlong 
course  in  South  Carolina.  The  alternative  presented  by  the 
dominant  party  there  is  so  monstrous  that  it  would  seem  im- 
possible that  it  should  be  sustained  by  any  of  the  most  sympa- 
thizing States,  unless  there  be  latent  views  apart  from  constitu- 
tional questions,  which  I  hope  cannot  be  of  much  extent.  The 
wisdom  that  meets  the  crisis  with  the  due  effect  will  greatly 
signalize  itself. 

The  idea  that  a  Constitution  which  has  been  so  fruitful  of 
blessings,  and  a  Union  admitted  to  be  the  only  guardian  of  the 
peace,  liberty,  and  happiness  of  the  people  of  the  States  com- 
prising it,  should  be  broken  up  and  scattered  to  the  winds,  with- 
out greater  than  any  existing  causes,  is  more  painful  than  words 
can  express.  It  is  impossible  that  this  can  ever  be  the  deliber- 
ate act  of  the  people,  if  the  value  of  the  Union  be  calculated  by 
the  consequences  of  disunion. 

I  am  much  exhausted,  and  can  only  add  an  affectionate  adieu. 


TO   N.   P.   TRIST. 

Montpelliek,  May  29,  1832. 

My  Dear  Sir, — Whilst  reflecting  in  my  sick  bed,  a  few 
mornings  ago,  on  the  dangers  hovering  over  our  Constitution, 
and  even  the  Union  itself,  a  few  ideas,  though  not  occurring 
for  the  first  time,  had  become  particularly  impressive  at  the 
present.     I  have  noted  them  by  the  pen  of  a  friend  on  the  en- 


1832.  LETTERS.  219 

closed  paper,  and  you  will  take  them  for  what  they  are  worth. 
If  that  be  anything,  and  they  happen  to  accord  with  your  own 
view  of  the  subject,  they  may  be  suggested  where  it  is  most 
likely  they  will  be  well  received;  but  without  naming  or  desig- 
nating, in  any  manner,  the  source  of  them. 

I  am  still  confined  to  my  bed  with  my  malady,  my  debility, 
and  my  ago,  in  triple  alliance  against  me.  Any  convalescence, 
therefore,  must  be  tedious,  not  to  add  imperfect. 

I  have  not  yet  ventured  on  the  perusal  of  the  book  you  sent 
me.  From  passages  read  to  me,  I  perceive  "that  the  venom  of 
its  shafts"  are  not  without  "a  vigor  in  the  bow." 


29  Mat,  1832. 
(The  paper  referred  to  as  inclosed  in  the  foregoing  letter.) 

The  main  cause  of  the  discords  which  hover  over  our  Consti- 
tution, and  even  the  Union  itself,  is  the  tariff  on  imports;  and 
the  great  complaint  against  the  tariff  is  the  inequality  of  the 
burthen  it  imposes  on  the  planting  and  manufacturing  States, 
the  latter  bearing  a  less  share  of  the  duties  on  protected  articles 
than  the  former.  This  being  the  case,  it  seems  reasonable  that 
an  equality  should  be  restored,  as  far  as  may  be,  by  duties  on 
unprotected  articles  consumed  in  a  greater  proportion  by  the 
manufacturing  States.  Let,  then,  a  selection  be  made  of  unpro- 
tected articles,  and  such  duties  imposed  on  them  as  will  have 
that  effect.  The  unprotected  article  of  Tea,  for  example,  known 
to  be  more  extensively  consumed  in  the  manufacturing  than  in 
the  planting  States,  might  be  regarded  as,  pro  tanto,  balancing 
the  disproportionate  consumption  of  the  protected  article  of 
coarse  woollens  in  the  South.  As  the  repeal  of  the  duty  on  tea 
and  some  other  articles  has  been  represented  by  southern  poli- 
ticians as  more  a  relief  to  the  North  than  to  the  South,  it  fol- 
lows that  the  North,  in  these  particulars,  has  for  many  years 
paid  taxes  not  proportionally  borne  by  the  South. 

Justice  certainly  recommeuds  some  equalizing  arrangement; 


220  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

and  in  a  compound  tariff  itself,  necessary  to  produce  an  equi- 
librium of  the  burthen,  (a  duty  on  any  single  article,  though  uni- 
form in  law,  being  uniform  in  its  operation,)  such  an  arrange- 
ment might  not  be  impracticable. 

Two  objections  may  perhaps  be  made:  first,  that  it  might 
produce  an  increase  of  surplus  revenue,  which  there  is  an  anxiety 
to  avoid.  But  as  a  certain  provision  for  an  adequate  revenue 
will  always  produce  a  surplus  to  be  disposed  of,  such  an  addition, 
if  not  altogether  avoidable,  would  admit  a  like  disposition.  In 
any  view,  the  evil  could  not  be  so  great  as  that  for  which  it  is 
suggested  as  a  remedy. 

The  second  objection  is,  that  such  an  adjustment  between  dif- 
ferent sections  of  the  nation  might  increase  the  difficulty  of  a 
proper  adjustment  between  different  descriptions  of  people,  par- 
ticularly between  the  richer  and  the  poorer.  But  here  again 
the  question  recurs,  whether  the  evil,  as  far  as  it  may  be  un- 
avoidable, be  so  great  as  a  continuance  of  the  threatening  dis- 
cords which  are  the  alternative. 

It  cannot  be  too  much  inculcated,  that  in  a  Government  like 
ours,  and,  indeed,  in  all  governments,  and  whether  in  the  case 
of  indirect  or  direct  taxes,  it  is  impossible  to  do  perfect  justice 
in  the  distribution  of  burthens  and  benefits,  and  that  equitable 
estimates  and  mutual  concessions  are  necessary  to  approach  it. 


TO   EDWARD    EVERETT. 

Montpelliek,  May  30,  1832. 

Dear  Sir,— I  am  indebted  to  you,  I  observe,  for  a  copy  of 
Mr.  Doddridge's  speech  on  the  subject  of  Congressional  privi- 
lege. A  part  of  it  has  been  read  to  me,  and  judging  from  that 
of  what  remains,  I  need  not  hesitate  to  pronounce  it  an  able 
one,  as  was  to  be  expected  from  its  able  author.  As  he  is  under 
a  mistake  in  supposing  me  to  have  drawn  the  Judicial  Act  of 
1789,  and  wishes  for  information,  it  may  be  proper  to  set  him 
rin-ht.     The  bill  originated  in  the  Senate,  of  which  I  was  not  a 


1832.  LETTERS.  221 

member,  and  the  task  of  preparing  it  was  understood,  justly  I 
believe,  to  have  been  performed  by  Mr.  Ellsworth,  in  consulta- 
tion, probably,  with  some  of  his  learned  colleagues. 

My  health  has  improved  but  little;  I  am  still  confined  to  my 
bed  in  a  state  of  much  debility,  the  effect  of  the  combined  causes 
of  rheumatism  and  bilious  fever. 


TO   PHILIP   DODDRIDGE. 

Montpellier,  June  G,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  1st  instant,  followed  by  a  copy 
of  your  speech  on  Congressional  privilege,  found  me  in  my  bed, 
to  which  I  have  been  confined  for  several  weeks  by  a  severe 
bilious  fever  uniting  itself  with  a  severe  rheumatism,  which  had 
kept  me  a  cripple,  (particularly  my  hands  and  fingers,)  and  a 
prisoner  in  my  house  for  many  months.  The  fever  has,  I  hope, 
ceased,  but  leaves  me  in  much  debility.  In  this  condition  you 
will,  I  am  sure,  pardon  me  for  not  undertaking  that  thorough 
consideration  of  the  subject  which  would  enable  me  to  do  justice 
to  your  critical  and  extensive  views  of  it.  I  feel  safe  in  saying, 
that  your  speech  is  a  very  able  one,  as  was  to  be  expected;  and 
I  may  add,  that  I  have  always  considered  the  right  of  self-pro- 
tection in  the  discharge  of  the  necessary  duties  as  inherent  in 
legislative  bodies  as  in  courts  of  justice;  in  the  State  Legisla- 
tures as  in  the  British  Parliament;  and  in  the  Federal  Legisla- 
ture as  in  both.  In  the  application  of  this  privilege  to  emerg- 
ing cases,  difficulties  and  differences  of  opinion  may  arise.  In 
deciding  on  these  the  reason  and  necessity  of  the  privilege  must 
be  the  guide.  It  is  certain  that  the  privilege  has  been  abused 
in  British  precedents,  and  may  have  been  in  American  also. 

Previous  to  receipt  of  your  letter  I  had  been  favored  by  Mr. 
Everett,  of  Massachusetts,  with  a  copy  of  your  speech,  which 
was  read  to  me;  and  observing  your  mistake  in  supposing  me  to 
have  drawn  the  Judicial  Act  of  1789, 1  thought  it  proper,  in  my 
answer,  to  furnish  the  means  of  correcting  it.  The  bill  origi- 
nated in  the  Senate,  of  which  I  was  not  a  member,  and  was  un- 


222  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

derstood,  truly  I  believe,  to  have  proceeded  from  Mr.  Ellsworth, 
availing  himself,  as  may  be  presumed,  of  consultations  with  some 
of  his  most  enlightened  colleagues.  Those  who  object  to  the 
control  given  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  U.  States  over  the 
State  courts,  ought  to  furnish  some  equivalent  mode  of  prevent- 
ing a  State  government  from  annulling  the  laws  of  the  U.  States 
through  its  Judiciary  department,  the  annulment  having  the  same 
anarchical  effect  as  is  brought  about  through  either  of  its  other 
departments. 

If  I  were  in  an  ill-humour  with  you,  which  I  am  not  and  never 
was,  I  might  here  advert  to  the  misconstruction  which,  in  your 
controversy  with  Mr.  Cook,  you  put  on  the  amendment  I  pro- 
posed in  our  late  Convention,  authorizing  the  Legislature,  two- 
thirds  of  each  House  concurring,  to  reapportion  the  representa- 
tion as  inequalities  might  from  time  to  time  require.  My  mo- 
tive, I  am  conscious,  was  pure,  and  the  object  I  still  think  proper. 
The  right  of  suffrage  and  the  rule  of  apportionment  of  repre- 
sentatives are  fundamentals  in  a  free  Government,  and  ought 
not  to  be  submitted  to  legislative  discretion.  The  former  had 
been  fixed  by  the  Constitution,  but  every  attempt  to  provide  a 
constitutional  rule  for  the  latter  had  failed,  and  of  course  no 
remedy  could  be  applied  for  the  greatest  inequalities  without  a 
Convention,  at  which  the  general  feeling  seemed  to  revolt.  In 
this  alternative  it  appeared  the  lesser  evil  to  give  the  power  of 
redress  to  the  Legislature,  controlling  its  discretion  by  requir- 
ing a  concurrence  of  two-thirds  instead  of  a  mere  majority. 
Should  the  power  be  duly  exercised,  all  will  be  well;  if  not,  the 
same  resorts  will  be  open  as  if  the  amendment  had  never  been 
proposed;  and  I  trust  I  am  not  too  sanguine  in  anticipating 
that  the  claims  of  justice,  witli  the  alternative  of  refusing  it,  will 
prevail  over  local  and  selfish  considerations. 

But  I  pass  with  pleasure  from  this  reminiscence  to  a  return 
of  my  thanks  for  your  communication,  and  a  tender  of  my  esteem 
and  my  friendly  salutations. 


1832.  LETTERS.  223 


TO   DAVID    HOFFMAN. 

June  13,  1832. 

J.  Madison,  with  his  respects  to  Mr.  Hoffman,  thanks  him  for 
the  copy  of  his  lecture  lately  delivered  in  the  University  of 
Maryland.  In  the  decrepit  and  feeble  state  of  the  health  of  J. 
M.  he  has  not  been  able  to  bestow  on  some  parts  of  the  lecture 
the  degree  of  attention  which  they  merit.  He  can  safely  pro- 
nounce it  to  be  a  happy  example,  in  which  erudite  disquisition 
is  presented  in  language  not  less  elegant  than  lucid. 

The  distinction  between  what  has  been  called  bench  legisla- 
tion and  judicial  interpretation  is  by  a  line  not  easy  to  be 
drawn,  though  necessary  to  be  observed.  It  is  probable  that  it 
has  been  very  imperfectly  regarded  in  the  modes  by  which  much 
of  English  law,  not  understood  to  have  been  brought  by  our 
emigrating  ancestors  with  them,  nor  adopted  by  legislative  en- 
actments, was  admitted  into  the  Colonial  codes,  and  is  now 
found  in  those  of  the  States.  There  is  an  obscurity  over  this 
class  of  innovations  which  it  would  require  extensive  researches 
to  remove — more  extensive,  perhaps,  than  might  be  rewarded 
by  an  attainable  success. 


29th  Joxe,  1832. 

I  have  received,  my  friends,  your  letter  of  the  25th  instant, 
inviting  me,  in  behalf  of  a  portion  of  the  citizens  of  Orange,  to 
be  a  guest  at  their  proposed  festive  celebration  on  the  4th  of 
July.  The  respect  we  all  feel  for  that  great  anniversary  would 
render  the  occasion  of  meeting  them  highly  gratifying  to  me; 
but  the  very  feeble  state  to  which  I  am  reduced  by  a  tedious  in- 
disposition, does  not  permit  me  to  consult  my  inclinations.  I 
avail  myself,  therefore,  of  the  alternative  you  suggest  of  substi- 
tuting a  sentiment;  and  I  offer  one  which  accords  with  the  sen- 
sibility expressed  by  the  Committee,  to  the  painful  aspect  given 
to  our  National  Confederacy  by  conflicting  opinions  on  import- 
ant questions  among  its  members: 


224  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

"  May  the  political  discords  in  our  country,  so  grateful  to  the 
[its  ?]  enemies,  be  speedily  brought  to  a  conclusion  that  will  in- 
spire fresh  confidence  in  the  friends  of  our  free  institutions." 

I  pray  the  Committee  to  accept  my  acknowledgments  for  the 
terms,  but  too  partial,  in  which  they  have  communicated  the 
invitation,  and  to  be  assured  of  my  sincere  esteem  and  regard 
for  them  individually. 

Lawrence  T.  Dade, 

Peyton  Grymes, 

Charles  P.  Howard, 

Thomas  Throop, 

William  R.  Robinson, 

Committee. 


TO   C.   E.   HAYNES. 

Montpellier,  August  27,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  12th. 

In  the  very  crippled  and  feeble  state  of  my  health,  I  cannot 
undertake  an  extended  answer  to  your  inquiries,  nor  should  I 
suppose  it  necessary  if  you  have  seen  my  letter  to  Mr.  Everett, 
in  August,  1830,  in  which  the  proceedings  of  Virginia  in  1798— 
99  were  explained,  and  the  novel  doctrine  of  nullification  ad- 
verted to. 

The  distinction  is  obvious  between,  1st,  Such  interpositions 
on  the  part  of  the  States  against  unjustifiable  acts  of  the  Fed- 
eral Government  as  are  within  the  provisions  and  forms  of  the 
Constitution.  These  provisions  and  forms  certainly  do  not 
embrace  the  nullifying  process  proclaimed  in  South  Carolina, 
which  begins  with  a  single  State  and  ends  with  the  ascendency 
of  a  minority  of  States  over  a  majority — of  seven  over  seven- 
teen; a  federal  law,  during  the  process,  being  arrested  within 
the  nullifying  State;  and,  if  a  revenue  law,  frustrated  through 
all  the  States.  2d,  Interpositions  not  within  the  purview  of  the 
Constitution,  by  the  States  in  the  sovereign  capacity  in  which 


1832.  LETTERS.  225 

they  were  parties  to  the  unconstitutional  compact.  And  hero 
it  must  be  kept  in  mind,  that  in  a  compact  like  that  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  as  in  all  other  compacts,  each  of  the  parties  has  an 
equal  right  to  decide  whether  it  has  or  has  not  been  violated 
and  made  void.  If  one  contends  that  it  has,  the  others  have  an 
equal  right  to  insist  on  the  validity  and  execution  of  it. 

It  seems  not  to  have  been  sufficiently  noticed,  that  in  the  pro- 
ceedings of  Virginia  referred  to,  the  plural  term  States  was  in- 
variably used  in  reference  to  their  interpositions;  nor  is  this 
sense  affected  by  the  object  of  maintaining,  within  their  respect- 
ive limits,  the  authorities,  rights,  and  liberties  appertaining  to 
them,  which  could  certainly  be  best  effectuated  for  each  by  co- 
operating interpositions. 

It  is  true  that,  in  extreme  cases  of  oppression  justifying  a  re- 
sort to  original  rights,  and  in  which  passive  obedience  and  non- 
resistence  cease  to  be  obligatory  under  any  Government,  a  sin- 
gle State  or  any  part  of  a  State  might  rightfully  cast  off  the 
yoke.  What  would  be  the  condition  of  the  Union,  and  the 
other  members  of  it,  if  a  single  member  could  at  will  renounce 
its  connexion,  and  erect  itself,  in  the  midst  of  them,  into  an  in- 
dependent and  foreign  power;  its  geographical  relations  remain- 
ing the  same,  and  all  the  social  and  political  relations,  with  the 
others,  converted  into  those  of  aliens  and  of  rivals,  not  to  say 
enemies,  pursuing  separate  and  conflicting  interests  ?  Should 
the  seceding  State  be  the  only  channel  of  foreign  commerce  for 
States  having  no  commercial  ports  of  their  own,  such  as  that 
of  Connecticut,  New  Jersey,  and  North  Carolina,  and  now  par- 
ticularly all  the  inland  States,  we  know  what  might  happen 
from  such  a  state  of  things  by  the  effects  of  it  under  the  old 
Confederation  among  States  bound  as  they  were  in  friendly  re- 
lations by  that  instrument.  This  is  a  view  of  the  subject  which 
merits  more  developments  than  it  appears  to  have  received. 

I  have  sketched  these  few  ideas  more  from  an  unwillingness 

to  decline  an  answer  to  your  letter  than  from  any  particular 

value  that  may  be  attached  to  them.     You  will  pardon  me, 

therefore,  for  requesting  that  you  will  regard  them  as  for  your- 

vol.  iv.  15 


226  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

self,  and  not  for  publicity,  which  my  very  advanced  age  renders 
every  day  more  and  more  to  be  avoided. 
Accept,  sir,  a  renewal  of  my  respects  and  regard. 


TO   BENJAMIN   ROMATNE. 

Montpellikr,  Nov.  8,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  the  two  copies  of  your  pamphlet 
on  State  sovereignty,  &c.  The  enfeebled  state  to  which  I  am 
reduced  by  a  tedious  illness  has  abridged  my  reading  to  its 
minimum,  and  my  fingers,  stiffened  by  rheumatism,  abhor  the 
pen.  I  have,  notwithstanding,  gone  through  the  pamphlet,  and 
drop  a  line  to  thank  you  for  it. 

I  have  found  in  the  publication  much  that  is  very  impressive, 
and  very  apropos  to  the  existing  conjuncture  in  our  political 
affairs;  and  I  wish  its  effect  in  cherishing  a  devotion  to  the 
Union  and  an  allegiance  to  the  Constitution  may  correspond 
with  the  patriotic  counsels  of  the  author. 

How  far  the  light  in  which  the  pamphlet  has  regarded  some 
of  the  lineaments  of  the  Constitution  may  not  be  identical  with 
the  view  I  have  taken  of  them,  I  do  not  critically  examine,  the 
rather  as  there  is  often  a  greater  difference  in  the  expression 
than  in  the  intention. 

Having,  in  a  letter  published  in  the  North  American  Review 
some  time  ago,  sketched  my  understanding  of  the  foundation 
and  frame  of  our  political  fabric,  you  can,  if  you  think  the  com- 
parison worth  making,  bring  the  difference  to  that  test.  The 
letter  embraced  the  subject  of  nullification,  on  which  our  judg- 
ments and  feelings  are  without  a  difference. 

I  am  sensible,  sir,  of  what  I  owe  for  the  kind  terms  in  which 
you  have  forwarded  your  copies,  and  I  beg  you  to  accept  this 
cordial  return  for  the  favor. 

I  need  not  say  that  these  crude  lines  are  not  for  public  use, 
of  which  they  are  obviously  not  worthy. 


1832.  LETTERS.  227 


TO   N.   P.   TRIST. 

Dec"  4th,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  seen  the  ordinance  of  the  Convention  of 
S.  Carolina,  and  the  Report  introducing  it.  The  latter  is  spe- 
ciously written;  will  be  demonstration  in  S.  Carolina,  and  not 
without  effect  in  cherishing  the  anti-tariff  sympathies  of  the 
other  Southern  States.  The  ordinance  must  have  a  counteract- 
ing effect;  to  what  extent  is  to  be  seen.  It  will  depend  much 
on  the  course  of  the  Federal  Government,  which  I  trust  will 
combine  with  effectual  means  for  defeating  the  nullifying  pro- 
cess, a  wise  moderation  that  will  transfer  to  it  the  sympathies 
withdrawn  from  the  contrasted  violence  in  S.  Carolina.  The 
expedients  you  suggest  for  the  upper  country  there,  would,  un- 
der other  circumstances,  be  at  once  decisive,  and  might  be  so  at 
present;  but  it  is  difficult  for  reason  to  calculate  the  rashness 
of  the  passions,  infuriated  as  they  are  in  the  nullifying  party. 
At  all  events,. if  any  effective  Government  or  the  Union  itself 
is  to  be  maintained,  a  triumph  of  that  party  in  a  scheme  fatal  to 
both  must  not  be  permitted. 

I  wish  you  may  be  able  to  pursue  your  object  of  compiling 
the  printed  materials  which  shew  the  state  of  things  during  the 
interval  between  the  peace  of  1783  and  the  adoption  of  the  Con- 
stitution, as  well  as  during  the  early  period  of  the  latter.  I 
have  long  wished  for  such  a  work,  not  only  for  its  future  value, 
but  for  the  salutary  lights  it  would  give  to  those  who  were  not 
cotemporaries  with  those  interesting  scenes  in  our  Revolution- 
ary drama,  and  are  'liable  to  be  misled  by  false  or  defective 
views  of  them.  How  far  I  may  be  able  to  aid  your  researches, 
by  particular  references,  I  cannot  say.  It  may  be  a  subject  of 
conversation,  when  I  have  the  pleasure  of  your  promised  visit  a 
few  weeks  hence. 


228  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

TO   N.   P.   TRIST. 

Montpellier,  December  23,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  yours  of  the  19th,  enclosing  some 
of  the  South  Carolina  papers.  There  are  in  one  of  them  some 
interesting  views  of  the  doctrine  of  secession — one  that  had  oc» 
curred  to  me,  and  which  for  the  first  time  I  have  seen  in  print — 
namely,  that  if  one  State  can,  at  will,  withdraw  from  the  others* 
the  others  can,  at  will,  withdraw  from  her,  and  turn  her,  nolen- 
tem  volentem,  out  of  the  Union.  Until  of  late,  there  is  not  a 
State  that  would  have  abhorred  such  a  doctrine  more  than  South 
Carolina,  or  more  dreaded  an  application  of  it  to  herself.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  the  doctrine  of  nullification,  which  she  now 
preaches  as  the  only  faith  by  which  the  Union  can  be  saved. 

I  partake  of  the  wonder,  that  the  men  you  name  should  view 
secession  in  the  light  mentioned.  The  essential  difference  be- 
tween a  free  government  and  governments  not  free,  is,  that  the 
former  is  founded  in  compact,  the  parties  to  which  are  mutually 
and  equally  bound  by  it.  Neither  of  them,  therefore,  can  have 
a  greater  right  to  break  off  from  the  bargain,  than  the  other  or 
others  have  to  hold  them  to  it.  And  certainly  there  is  nothing 
in  the  Virginia  resolutions  of  1798  adverse  to  this  principle, 
which  is  that  of  common  sense  and  common  justice.  The  fal- 
lacy which  draws  a  different  conclusion  lies  in  confounding  a 
single  party  with  the  parties  to  the  constitutional  compact  of  the 
United  States.  The  latter  having  made  the  compact,  may  do 
what  they  will  with  it.  The  former,  as  one  only  of  the  parties* 
owes  fidelity  to  it  till  released  by  consent,  or  absolved  by  an 
intolerable  abuse  of  the  power  created.  In  the  Virginia  reso- 
lutions and  report  the  plural  number,  States,  is  in  every  instance 
used  where  reference  is  made  to  the  authority  which  presided 
over  the  Government.  As  I  am  now  known  to  have  drawn 
those  documents,  I  may  say,  as  I  do  with  a  distinct  recollection, 
that  the  distinction  was  intentional.  It  was,  in  fact,  required 
by  the  course  of  reasoning  employed  on  the  occasion.  The 
Kentucky  resolutions,  being  less  guarded,  have  been  more  easily 
perverted.    The  pretext  for  the  liberty  taken  with  those  of  Vir- 


1832.  LETTERS. 


229 


ginia  is  the  word  respective,  prefixed  to  the  "rights,"  &c,  to  be 
secured  within  the  States.  Could  the  abuse  of  the  expression 
have  been  foreseen  or  suspected,  the  form  of  it  would  doubtless 
have  been  varied.  But  what  can  be  more  consistent  with  com- 
mon sense,  than  that  all  having  the  same  rights,  &c,  should 
unite  in  contending  for  the  security  of  them  to  each  ? 

It  is  remarkable  how  closely  the  nullifiers,  who  make  the 
name  of  Mr.  Jefferson  the  pedestal  for  their  colossal  heresy,  shut 
their  eyes  and  lips  whenever  his  authority  is  ever  so  clearly  and 
emphatically  against  them.  You  have  noticed  what  he  says  in 
his  letters  to  Monroe  and  Carrington,  pages  43  and  203,  vol. 
ii,  with  respect  to  the  powers  of  the  old  Congress  to  coerce  de- 
linquent States,  and  his  reasons  for  preferring  for  the  purpose 
a  naval  to  a  military  force;  and,  moreover,  that  it  was  not  ne- 
cessary to  find  a  right  to  coerce  in  the  federal  articles,  that  being 
inherent  in  the  nature  of  a  compact.  It  is  high  time  that  the 
claim  to  secede  at  will  should  be  put  down  by  the  public  opinion; 
and  I  shall  be  glad  to  see  the  task  commenced  by  one  who  un- 
derstands the  subject. 

I  know  nothing  of  what  is  passing  at  Richmond,  more  than 
what  is  seen  in  the  newspapers.  You  were  right  in  your  fore. 
sight  of  the  effect  of  the  passages,  in  the  late  proclamation. 
They  have  proved  a  leaven  for  much  fermentation  there,  and 
created  an  alarm  against  the  danger  of  consolidation,  balancing 
that  of  disunion.  I  wish,  with  you,  the  Legislature  may  not 
seriously  injure  itself  by  assuming  the  high  character  of  medi- 
ator. They  will  certainly  do  so  if  they  forget  that  their  real 
influence  will  be  in  the  inverse  ratio  of  a  boastful  interposition 
of  it. 

If  you  can  fix  and  will  name  the  day  of  your  arrival  at  Orange 
Court  House,  we  will  have  a  horse  there  for  you;  and  if  you 
have  more  baggage  than  can  be  otherwise  brought  than  on 
wheels,  we  will  send  such  a  vehicle  for  it.  Such  is  the  state  of 
the  roads,  produced  by  the  wagons  hurrying  flour  to  market, 
that  it  may  be  impossible  to  send  our  carriage,  which  would 
answer  both  purposes. 


030  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    CABELL. 

Montpellier,  Dec.  27,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  this  moment  only  received  yours  of  the 
22d.  I  regret  the  delay,  as  you  wished  an  earlier  answer  than 
you  can  now  have,  though  I  shall  send  this  immediately  to  the 
post-oflicc.  My  correspondence  with  Judge  Roane  originated 
in  the  request  that  I  would  take  up  the  pen  on  the  subject  he 
was  discussing,  or  about  to  discuss.  Although  I  concurred  much 
in  his  views  of  it,  I  differed,  as  you  will  see,  with  regard  to  the 
power  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  relation 
to  the  State  court.  This  was  in  my  last  letter,  which  being  an 
answer,  did  not  require  one,  and  none  was  received.  My  view 
of  the  supremacy  of  the  federal  court,  when  the  Constitution 
was  under  discussion,  will  be  found  in  the  Federalist.  Perhaps 
I  may,  as  could  not  be  improper,  have  alluded  to  cases  (of  which 
all  courts  must  judge)  within  the  scope  of  its  functions.  Mr. 
Pendleton's  opinion  that  there  ought  to  be  an  appeal  from  the 
Supreme  Court  of  a  State  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  contained  in  his  letter  to  me,  was,  I  find,  avowed  in  the 
Convention  of  Virginia,  and  so  stated  by  his  nephew,  latterly 
in  Congress.  I  send  you  a  copy  of  Col.  J.  Taylor's  argument 
on  the  carriage  tax.  If  I  understand  the  beginning  pages,  he 
is  not  only  high-toned  as  to  judicial  power,  but  regards  the  fed- 
eral court  as  the  paramount  authority.  Is  it  possible  to  resist 
the  nullifying  inference  from  the  doctrine  that  makes  the  State 
courts  uncontrollable  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  ? 

I  cannot  lay  my  hand  on  my  letter  to  Judge  Roane.*  The 
word  omitted,  I  presume,  is  argument.  It  is  a  common  com- 
pliment among  the  French,  as  you  know,  to  say  you  have  given 
all  its  lustre,  &c.       *       *       *       * 

What  is  said  in  my  letter  to  Mr.  Everett,  in  the  North  Ameri- 
can Review,  as  to  the  origin  of  the  Constitution,  I  considered 
as  squaring  with  the  account  given  in  the  Federalist  of  the  niix- 

*  See  Vol.  iii.,  p.  222. 


1832.  LETTERS.  231 

ture  of  national  and  federal  features  in  the  Constitution.  That 
view  of  it  was  well  received  at  the  time  by  its  friends,  and,  I 
believe,  has  not  been  controverted  by  the  republican  party.  A 
marked  and  distinctive  feature  in  the  resolutions  of  1798  is,  that 
the  'plural  number  is  invariably  used  in  them,  and  not  the  singu- 
lar, and  the  course  of  the  reasoning  required  it. 

As  to  my  change  of  opinion  about  the  bank,  it  was  in  con- 
formity to  an  unchanged  opinion  that  a  certain  course  of  prac- 
tice required  it. 

The  tariff  is  unconnected  with  the  resolutions  of  1798.  In 
the  first  Congress  of  1789  I  sustained,  and  have  in  every  situa- 
tion since  adhered  to  it.  I  had  flattered  myself,  in  vain  it  seems, 
that  whatever  my  political  errors  may  have  been,  I  was  as  little 
chargeable  with  inconsistencies  as  any  of  my  fellow-labourers 
through  so  long  a  period  of  political  life. 


TO   JOSEPH    C.    CABELL. 

Montpellier,  Dec.  28,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  wrote  you  a  few  lines  last  evening  in  answer 
to  yours  of  the  22d.  Resuming  my  search  for  the  letter  of  June 
29,  1821,  *I have  been  successful,  and  hasten  to  give  you  the 
words  omitted  in  your  copy.  After  "  their  full  lustre,"  fill  the 
blank  with  the  words  "  to  the  arguments  against  the  suability 
of  States  by  individuals."  I  was  rather  surprised  to  find  such 
a  substantial  identity  in  several  respects  between  the  letter  and 
that  to  Mr.  Everett,  the  member  of  Congress,  which  went  into 
the  North  American  Review.  I  am  less  apprehensive  of  being 
convicted  of  inconsistencies  in  political  opinions  than  I  am  un- 
willing to  be  thought  obtrusive  of  them  on  the  public.  I  believe 
not  a  single  letter  of  that  sort  has  been  published  which  was 
not  an  answer,  as  was  that  to  Mr.  Everett.  The  occasion  which 
led  to  the  tenour  of  this  last,  was  the  reference  to,  and  miscon- 
struction of,  the  Virginia  resolutions  of  1798,  which  I  wished 
to  rescue  from  the  erroneous  use  of  them.  I  will  mention  to 
you  in  confidence,  that  I  had  previously  written  a  very  similar 
*  See  Vol.  iii.,  p.  222. 


232  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

one  to  Col.  Haync,  in  answer  to  a  communication  of  his  speech, 
&c,  in  which  he  had  referred  to,  and  supported  his  heresy,  by 
the  authority  of  Virginia.  He  promised  to  answer  my  letter, 
but  never  did. 

I  mentioned  that  I  had  been  uniform  in  my  views  of  several 
great  constitutional  questions.  I  might  have  added  to  them  the 
question  concerning  roads  and  canals,  and  the  phrase  "  common 
defence  and  general  welfare."  On  the  subject  of  the  tariff,  now 
the  theme  and  the  torch  which  agitates  and  inflames  the  public 
mind,  my  course  has  not  varied  through  the  period  commencing 
with  the  Federal  Government,  and  down  to  my  letters  to  you  a 
few  years  ago. 

I  observe  that  the  Report  of  the  Committee  on  the  South 
Carolina  and  other  papers  copy  into  it  one  of  the  resolutions 
of  1798,  and  italicize  it.  The  aspect  of  it,  without  the  explana- 
tion of  the  report  of  1799,  may  be  perverted  to  a  nullifying  use 
by  the  word  "respective."  But  it  was  not  extraordinary  that 
the  States  should  co-operate  all  for  attaining  the  objects  of  each. 
Had  a  nullification  by  a  single  State  occurred  as  a  doctrine 
likely  to  claim  countenance  from  the  expression,  the  contempo- 
rary evidence  which  has  been  given  of  the  temper  and  views  of 
the  General  Assembly  justifies  the  presumption  that  it  would 
have  been  sufficiently  varied.  It  is  not  probable  that  such  an 
idea  as  the  South  Carolina  nullification  had  ever  entered  the 
thoughts  of  a  single  member,  or  even  those  of  a  citizen  of  South 
Carolina  herself. 


TO   PROFESSOR   DAVIS. — (NOT   SENT.) 

Montpellier,  1832.     [1833.] 

Dear  Sir, — I  received  in  due  time  the  copy  of  your  lectures 
on  the  constitutionality  of  the  "  protective  duties." 

No  one  can  commend  more  than  I  do  the  freedom  with  which 
you  have  discussed  the  subject,  or  be  more  disposed  than  I  am 
to  do  justice  to  the  ingenuity  of  the  reasoning  and  the  literary 
stamp  which  the  lecture  exhibits.     But  as  it  has  taken  for  its 


1832.  LETTERS.  233 

text  "  a  view  of  the  constitutional  power  of  Congress  to  pro- 
mote and  protect  domestic  manufactures,"  contained  in  a  letter 
from  mo  to  J.  C.  Cabell,  I  may  be  permitted  to  offer  the  re- 
marks to  which  I  think  the  adverse  view  maintained  in  the  lec- 
ture is  liable. 

I  must  begin  with  a  protest  against  the  passage  which  classes 
me  "  with  others  who  extend  the  constitutional  power  of  Con- 
gress over  commerce,  even  to  the  occupations  of  tradesmen,  such 
as  carpenters,"  &c.  Against  such  an  error  I  might  safely  appeal 
to  the  language  in  several  parts  of  the  letter,  and  to  the  obvious 
scope  of  all  its  reasoning,  as  necessarily  showing  that  the  trade 
which  Congress  had  the  power  to  regulate  meant  commerce, 
and,  in  its  application  there,  "  foreign  commerce."  But  in  the 
outset  of  the  letter  is  a  sentence  which,  if  it  had  not  been  over- 
looked, would  have  saved  the  lecture  from  the  error  it  commit- 
ted. The  sentence  is  in  these  words:  "It  [the  question  to  be 
examined]  is  a  simple  question,  whether  the  power  to  regulate 
trade  with  foreign  nations,  as  a  distinct  and  substantive  item  in 
the  enumerated  powers,  embraces  the  object  of  encouraging,  by 
duties,  restrictions,  and  prohibitions,  the  manufactures  and  pro- 
ducts of  the  country."  If,  in  citing  the  Constitution,  the  word 
trade  was  put  in  the  place  of  commerce,  the  word  foreign  made 
it  synonymous  with  commerce.  Trade  and  commerce  are,  in 
fact,  used  indiscriminately,  both  in  books  and  in  conversation. 
Free  trade,  in  its  most  familiar  sense,  is  the  phrase  for  the  free- 
dom of  foreign  commerce;  and  the  internal  interchanges  between 
the  towns  and  the  country  are  as  often  expressed  by  the  term 
commerce  as  by  the  term  trade.  Whether  there  be  "  others  " 
whe  extend  the  commercial  power  of  Congress  to  the  occupa- 
tions of  tradesmen,  I  know  not.  If  there  be,  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  so  gross  a  misconstruction  was  entitled  to  all  the  dis- 
proof bestowed  on  it. 

The  grounds  on  which  the  constitutionality  of  the  tariff  for 
the  encouragement  of  manufactures  is  denied,  are,  that  the  ex- 
press power  granted  to  Congress  to  impose  duties,  limits  them 
to  the  sole  purpose  of  revenue,  and  that  no  power  to  impose 


2^4  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

them  is  involved  in,  or  incident  to,  the  power  to  regulate  com- 
merce with  foreign  nations. 

According  to  this  construction  of  the  Constitution,  Congress 
would  be  without  the  power  to  impose  duties  on  imports  for 
protecting  domestic  articles  for  public  defence,  for  retaliating 
or  countervailing  foreign  regulations  against  our  products,  or 
even  for  securing  our  navigation  against  the  monopolizing  pol- 
icy of  other  Governments. 

Yet  it  is  admitted  by  some  of  the  most  intelligent  opponents 
of  a  tariff  for  the  encouragement  of  domestic  manufactures,  that 
Congress  have  the  power  to  protect  domestic  articles  necessary 
for  public  defence;  and  there  are  few  who  deny  the  power  to 
retaliate  or  countervail  foreign  restrictions  and  discriminations; 
nor  any,  perhaps,  who  deny  it  in  behalf  of  our  navigation.  Now 
in  all  those  cases  it  is  known  that,  among  the  means  of  executing 
the  protective  power,  duties  on  imports  are  the  most  common, 
the  most  familiar,  and  the  most  appropriate;  often,  too,  where 
they  have  the  necessary  effect  of  abridging  or  preventing,  in- 
stead of  raising  revenue. 

Those  who  admit  the  protective  power  by  duties  on  imports, 
but  only  where  the  protective  effect  is  involved  in,  or  results 
from,  duties  having  revenue  directly  and  principally  for  their 
object,  are  not  a  little  puzzled  by  cases  where  the  protective 
effect  obviously  and  necessarily  defeats  or  diminishes  the  rev- 
enue object.  They  might  be  reminded,  also,  that  they  would 
make  a  protection  of  the  vital  interests  of  their  country  depend 
on  revenue  duties  on  imports,  when  the  wants  of  the  Govern- 
ment might  be  preferably  supplied  by  direct  taxes,  by  the  sales 
of  public  lands,  by  metallic  or  other  adventitious  resources.  The 
great  demand  for  revenue,  and  an  extensive  resort  to  duties  on 
imports,  has  been  occasioned  by  public  debts;  and  it  would  be 
a  strange  doctrine  that  those  vital  interests  could  not  be  best 
encouraged  or  protected  by  the  United  States,  without  the  mis- 
fortune of  being  in  debt,  or  with  the  good  fortune  of  having 
other  resources  rendering  duties  on  imports  unnecessary  and  in- 
eligible.  The  casualties  and  fluctuations  of  the  pecuniary  wants 


1832.  LETTERS.  235 

of  a  Government  would,  indeed,  be  inconsistent  with  any  steady 
and  adequate  protection  of  domestic  products,  if  dependent  on 
the  amount  of  those  wants. 

On  the  concessions  made  by  the  adversaries  of  a  protective 
tariff,  the  lecture  seems  not  a  little  to  waver;  sometimes  limit- 
ing the  power  of  Congress  to  duties  for  revenue  alone,  at  others 
admitting,  though  with  hesitation  and  doubts,  retaliatory  or 
countervailing  duties  against  foreign  restrictions,  but  under  the 
following  limitations:  1.  That  the  duties  be  not  continued  after 
they  are  found  to  be  ineffectual  to  produce  the  repeal  of  the  for- 
eign restrictions  (pages  14, 15.)  2.  That  the  duties  be  laid  for 
the  purpose  of  promoting  commerce.  3.  That  the  regulation 
must  operate  externally,  not  internally.  4.  That  the  object  be 
not  an  encouragement  of  domestic  manufactures. 

1.  The  condition  on  which  a  continuance  of  a  retaliating 
measure  is  made  to  depend,  namely,  its  being  found  to  be  inef- 
fectual, is  too  indefinite  for  a  constitutional  rule.  But,  apart 
from  this,  what  would  be  the  effect  if  it  were  believed  to  be  a 
constitutional  rule,  or  even  an  inviolable  policy  of  the  Govern- 
ment, that  if  the  foreign  party  would  hold  out,  this  country 
would  give  in?  It  would  be  as  well  to  submit  at  once,  as  to 
enter  the  contest  with  such  a  notice  to  the  other  party.  Nor 
would  the  effect  of  our  retirement  from  it  be,  as  the  lecture  sup- 
poses, (p.  15)  a  "reciprocal  injury."  It  would,  on  the  contrary, 
be  a  complete  attainment  of  the  object  of  the  foreign  party. 
Take,  for  example,  the  case  of  a  foreign  government  discrimi- 
nating between  its  vessels  and  ours,  by  a  tunnage  duty  in  fa- 
vour of  its  own,  and  a  retaliating  discrimination  on  our  part; 
is  it  not  obvious  that  a  repeal  of  our  discrimination,  instead  of 
inflicting  an  injury  on  the  persevering  party,  would  secure  to 
him  a  monopoly  of  the  navigation  between  the  two  countries? 
If  illustration  could  be  required,  it  might  be  found  in  what  oc- 
curred between  the  peace  of  1783  and  the  establishment  of  the 
present  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  Great  Britain  did 
not  fail  to  enforce  her  discriminating  laws  against  the  naviga- 
tion of  this  country  in  its  independent  character.  Several  of 
the  States,  Virginia  in  the  number,  being  anxious  for  a  just  re- 


236 


WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 


ciprocity,  made  regulations  having  that  for  their  object.  It 
was  soon  found,  however,  that  the  experiments  were  rendered 
ineffectual  by  the  want  of  a  common  authority  to  unite  the 
whole,  and  by  the  utter  failure  of  individual  retaliations.  The 
consequence  was,  that  Great  Britain,  being  satisfied  that  her 
monopoly  had  nothing  to  dread  from  this  quarter,  persevered  in 
the  enjoyment  of  it  until  the  federal  authority  created  by  the 
new  Constitution  was  put  in  force  against  it. 

2.  If  by  'promoting  be  meant  a  necessary  enlargement  of  com- 
merce, the  authority  for  applying  in  that  sense  the  terms  "  reg- 
ulate commerce  "  does  not  appear.  Commerce  may  be  advan- 
tageously checked  in  some  cases  as  well  as  extended  in  others. 
Most,  if  not  all,  of  the  regulating  or  countervailing  regulations, 
have  the  effect  of  abridging  commerce,  some  of  them  durably 
and  even  permanently.  In  regulating  commerce  with  the  In- 
dian tribes,  it  may  well  happen  that  its  limits  ought  to  be  nar- 
rowed. Congress  are  authorized  to  regulate  the  value  of  for- 
eign coin.  It  was  never  understood  that  the  value  might  not 
be  reduced,  as  well  as  raised;  reduced,  not  with  a  view  to  pro- 
mote, but  to  prevent  its  circulation.  [The  term  "  promote," 
taken  in  the  latitude  it  would  bear,  would  open  a  wider  door, 
certainly  a  less  definite  range,  for  the  power  "  to  regulate  "  for- 
eign commerce  than  is  claimed  for  it.] 

3.  Nor  can  the  constitutional  power  of  Congress  to  regulate 
commerce  be  limited  to  regulations  operating  externally  only, 
and  in  no  manner  internally,  so  as  to  interfere  with,  or  control, 
the  pursuits  of  the  States.  There  are  perhaps  but  few  regula- 
tions of  foreign  commerce  which  do  not  operate  on  internal 
pursuits,  whether  the  regulations  be  in  the  form  of  municipal 
enactments  or  of  treaties.  What  is  the  duty  which  protects 
ship-building  itself,  which  is  a  species  of  manufacture,  but  a  reg- 
ulation operating  internally,  and  so  far  inviting  labour  and 
capital  from  other  pursuits?  What  are  the  late  stipulations  in 
the  treaty  with  France,  in  favour  of  her  silks  and  wines,  but  so 
many  interferences  controlling  the  production  of  these  articles 
among  ourselves  ? 

4.  The  final  limitation  of  duties  requires  "that  they  be  not 


1832.  LETTERS.  237 

laid  for  the  purposes  of  protecting  or  encouraging  manufac- 
tures." To  avoid  anticipating  too  much  the  main  question  to 
be  decided,  the  following  case  will  be  only  here  stated  as  bear- 
ing on  it.  Should  a  foreign  government,  a  case  far  from  imag- 
inary, give  a  bounty  on  the  export  of  its  manufactures,  for  the 
obvious  purpose  of  underselling  and  undermining  the  vital  man. 
ufactures  of  another  country,  would  not  a  duty  balancing  the 
bounty  be  a  commercial  regulation,  an  exercise  of  the  power 
"to  regulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations?"  Yet  the  object 
and  effect  of  the  regulation  would  not  be  revenue,  for  that  would 
be  diminished,  if  not  prevented,  by  the  discouragement  of  the 
imports.  The  sole  object  and  effect  would  be  a  support  and 
protection  of  domestic  manufactures. 

The  lecture  appears  to  have  fallen  into  several  errors  or  in- 
accuracies in  the  following  passage  (page  7:)  "While  duties 
are  imposed  for  the  sole  purpose  of  revenue,  the  uniformity  of 
contribution  required  by  the  Constitution  may  be  easily  ob- 
tained. But  if  they  may  be  laid  for  any  other  purpose,  gross 
practical  inequality  is  the  unavoidable  result.  Again:  while 
duties  are  imposed  for  the  sole  purpose  of  revenue,  their  amount 
is  necessarily  regulated  by  the  wants  of  the  treasury  for  those 
objects  confided  to  the  care  of  the  Federal  Government.  But 
if  they  may  be  laid  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  commerce,  their 
amount  is  illimitable,  and  may  exceed  the  wants  of  the  treasury 
by  countless  millions.  What  then  becomes  of  the  restriction 
which  controls  the  appropriation  of  the  funds  of  the  Govern- 
ment? By  that  restriction,  Congress  may  only  appropriate 
money  for  certain  objects.  These  objects  are  precisely  enumer- 
ated, and  the  requisite  appropriations  for  them  are  limited,  if 
not  previously  ascertained.  But  whatever  funds  are  raised  by 
the  exercise  of  the  powers  of  Government,  Congress  will  surely 
appropriate  to  some  objects,"  &c. 

If  by  uniformity,  be  meant  equality,  (though  that  is  not  its 
constitutional  meaning,)  it  does  not  follow  that  it  would  be 
easily  obtained  by  duties  on  imports  [that  is,  on  consumption] 
for  revenue  alone.  Whatever  be  the  purpose  for  which  such 
duties  are  laid,  inequality  is  in  some  degree  unavoidable,  and 


238  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

gross  inequality  but  too  practicable.  Duties  for  the  mere  sup- 
port of  Government  may  be  so  distributed  on  articles  differently 
consumed  in  different  places  or  by  different  classes,  as  to  have 
the  most  unequal  operation. 

Nor  does  it  follow,  if  duties  be  laid  for  the  purpose  of  regu- 
lating commerce,  "  that  their  amount  is  illimitable,  and  may 
exceed  the  wants  of  the  treasury  by  countless  millions.'''  The 
power  to  regulate  commerce  being  one  of  the  objects  expressly 
confided  to  the  care  of  the  Federal  Government,  the  language 
used  would  import,  that  no  duty  could  be  laid  for  regulating 
commerce,  at  least  if  not  producing  revenue,  a  point  yielded  [by 
most  of  the  opponents  of  the  tariff  in  favour  of  manufactures 
and  apparently  elsewhere]  by  the  lecture  itself,  though  here  it 
seems  to  be  decided  on  the  ground  that  duties  laid,  not  for  rev- 
enue, but  "  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  commerce,"  confided 
as  this  is,  to  the  care  of  the  Federal  Government,  and  if  so  lim- 
ited, if  not  precisely  ascertained,  is  "  illimitable."  Supposing 
that  the  lecture  meant,  by  regulating  commerce,  regulations  for 
the  encouragement  of  manufactures,  still  the  amount  of  the  en- 
couraging duties  would  not  necessarily  be  illimitable  more  than 
the  amount  of  duties  for  revenue  alone.  The  amount  would  de- 
pend in  both  cases  on  that  of  the  imports,  which  must  be  the 
subject  of  estimate  in  both;  with  this  difference  only,  that  pre- 
cision in  the  estimate  where  the  encouragement  of  manufactures 
is  the  object  may  be  slightly  affected  by  the  influence  of  the 
annual  progress  of  manufactures,  itself,  however,  not  unsuscep- 
tible of  estimate. 

The  lecture,  in  this  passage,  has  not  sufficiently  kept  in  view 
the  distinction  between  the  abuse  and  the  usurpation  of  power, 
and  between  the  taxing  and  appropriating  power.  It  takes  for 
granted  that  Congress,  abusing  its  power,  will  draw  more  mo- 
ney into  the  treasury  than  may  be  wanted  for  it,  and  will  appro- 
priate it  to  objects,  whether  submitted  to  them  by  the  Constitu- 
tion or  not.  That  they  may  do  both,  and  may  have  done  both, 
is  quite  possible.  But  the  power  to  lay  duties  for  the  encour- 
agement of  manufactures,  from  which  revenue  may  accrue,  and 
the  power  to   appropriate  it,  involve   distinct   constitutional 


1832.  LETTERS.  239 

questions.  Not  a  few  who  regard  the  protective  tariff  as  con- 
stitutional, limit  the  appropriating  power  to  the  enumerated 
objects  strictly  interpreted,  whatever  be  the  source  of  the  reve- 
nue, whether  duties  on  imports,  direct  taxes,  mines,  captures  in 
war,  or  other  adventitious  sources.  However  liable  to  abuse 
the  contested  power  of  protection  may  be,  as  a  source  of  surplus 
revenue,  and  as  a  means  of  wasteful  application,  the  extent  of 
these  abuses  is  not  to  be  compared  with  those  of  which  the  ac- 
knowledged power  of  providing  for  wars,  and  armies  and  navies, 
is  susceptible.  The  constitutional  control  of  Congress,  in  ap- 
plying surplus  moneys  in  the  treasury  to  constitutional  objects, 
is  in  the  responsibility  of  that  body  to  its  constituents.  The 
liability  to  abuse  cannot  invalidate  a  granted  power,  though  it 
may  be  a  reason  for  not  granting  it  where  the  liability  to  abuse 
was  not  more  than  balanced  by  the  expected  use  of  it.  I  have 
said  that  equality  in  distributing  the  burden  of  duties  paid  by 
the  consumption  of  imported  articles  is  not  easily  obtained. 
This  would  be  the  case  if  the  duties  were  imposed  by  the  States 
individually  on  their  own  citizens.  In  the  United  States,  the 
difficulty  is  increased  by  the  greater  diversity  in  the  habits  and 
other  circumstances  among  the  States  themselves.  No  single 
article  is  equally  consumed  everywhere,  and  it  is  only  by  a 
mixed  tariff,  in  which  inequalities  of  consumption  in  different 
sections  may  balance  each  other,  that  a  fair  distribution  of  the 
burden  can  be  approximated.  This  might  be  effected,  in  a  cer- 
tain degree  at  least,  even  in  a  protective  tariff,  by  such  an  ar- 
rangement of  the  duties  as  would  balance  the  burden  between 
sections  consuming  the  unprotected  articles,  and  the  consumers 
of  the  protected  articles,  thus  leaving  the  policy  of  protection 
in  every  case,  as  much  as  possible,  to  the  question,  how  far  the 
protection  would  be  a  temporary  sacrifice,  compensated  by  its 
general  and  permanent  advantages,  or  otherwise. 

In  a  marginal  note  [page  20]  it  is  observed,  that  "  so  far  as 
the  partial  operation  of  any  measure  of  the  Federal  Government 
may  affect  its  constitutionality,  it  is  in  regard  to  States,  and  not 
individuals  or  classes  of  individuals,  that  it  must  have  this  ope- 
ration, because  States,  and  not  individuals,  are  the  parties  to 


240  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

the  federal  compact.  This  is  more  particularly  the  case  in  re- 
spect to  all  measures  relating  to  taxation,  in  consequence  of  the 
provisions  of  the  Constitution  intended  to  secure  equality  of 
contribution  among  the  States.  If  they  bear  unequally  on  in- 
dividuals or  classes,  they  are  unjust  and  oppressive,  but  not, 
therefore,  unconstitutional." 

The  precise  import  of  this  passage  is  not  very  clear.  The 
only  constitutional  provision  securing  equality  of  contribution 
among  the  States  is  in  the  case  of  direct  taxes.  In  the  case  of 
indirect  taxes  no  such  effect  could  be  secured.  The  provision 
which  requires  a  uniformity  of  duties  in  all  the  ports  throughout 
the  States,  does  not  secure  equality  of  contribution  among  the 
States  more  than  among  individuals  or  classes,  the  intercourse 
among  the  States  being  free,  and  the  articles  consumed  not 
being  distinguished  by  reference  to  their  ports  of  entry,  not  to 
mention  that  there  are  States  having  no  ports  of  entry.  Nor  is 
the  distinction  which  seems  to  be  implied  in  the  note  less  un- 
sound than  the  reason  assumed  for  it,  "  that  States,  not  indi- 
viduals, are  parties  to  the  federal  compact." 

True  it  is,  that  the  federal  compact  was  not  formed  by  indi- 
viduals as  the  parties — that  is,  by  the  people  acting  as  a  single 
community.  It  was  formed,  nevertheless,  by  the  people  acting 
as  separate  communities,  in  their  sovereign  and  highest  capa- 
city; a  capacity  in  which,  if  they  had  so  willed,  they  could  have 
made  themselves  a  single  community,  or  have  reduced  their 
confederate  system  into  an  ordinary  league  or  alliance;  and 
the  authority  which  could  have  done  the  former,  could  certainly 
take  the  middle  course,  which  was  taken  in  establishing  the 
existing  Constitution.  In  a  word,  the  constitutional  compact 
being  formed  by  an  authority  perfectly  competent,  its  obliga- 
tory and  operative  character  must  be  the  same  as  if  it  had  been 
formed  in  any  other  mode  by  an  authority  not  more  competent; 
and  while  undissolved  by  consent  or  by  force,  it  must  be  exe- 
cuted, within  the  extent  of  its  granted  powers,  according  to 
the  forms  and  provisions  prescribed  in  it,  without  reference  to 
the  mode  of  its  formation.  In  the  event  of  a  dissolution  of  the 
compact,  a  distinctive  effect  would  be,  that  the  States  would  fall 


1832.  LETTERS. 


241 


back  into  their  character  of  single  and  separate  communities- 
whereas  a  dissolution  of  the  social  compact  on  which  single 
communities  are  founded,  would  have  the  effect  of  restoring  or 
reducing  individuals  to  a  state  of  nature. 

But  the  people  were  not  only  parties  to  the  Constitution  in 
the  mode  explained;  they  stand  under  its  organization  in  the 
same  relation  to  their  representatives  in  the  Legislature  of  the 
United  States,  as  they  do  to  their  representatives  in  the  State 
legislature,  and  have  the  same  right  to  expect  from  the  former, 
as  from  the  latter,  a  like  regard  to  the  rules  of  justice  in  dis- 
tributing burdens,  especially  those  of  taxation,  among  indi- 
viduals and  classes,  as  among  sections  of  country,  however  de- 
nominated. The  Constitution  must  have  had  this  in  view  when 
vesting  in  the  representatives  of  the  people,  in  exclusion  of  the 
representatives  of  the  States,  the  right  to  originate  bills  of  rev- 
enue. It  may  be  added,  that  the  obligation  of  the  federal  rep- 
resentatives to  a  fair  apportionment  of  taxes  on  individuals  is 
strengthened  by  the  consideration,  that  the  greatest  expenditures 
will  be  required  for  objects  submitted  to  the  federal  authority, 
for  the  state  of  war,  and  for  the  military  and  naval  establish- 
ments intended  to  prevent  or  to  meet  it. 

The  lecture,  assuming  that  Congress  has  been  denied  the 
power  to  encourage  manufactures,  because  it  is  not  specially 
granted  as  a  direct  and  substantive  power,  considers  the  patrons 
of  the  power  as  exercising  a  prohibited  power  by  means  of  a 
power  not  granted.  But  the  very  point  in  question  is,  whether 
the  power  has  been  denied;  whether  the  granted  power  to  regu- 
late commerce  with  foreign  nations  does  not  embrace  the  object 
of  domestic  manufactures,  though  not  specially  named  in  the 
grant.  If  every  exercise  of  power  not  named  in  the  grant  was 
understood  to  be  prohibited,  which  of  the  granted  powers  might 
not  be  without  the  necessary  and  proper  means  of  attaining  its 
object?  it  is  admitted  by  the  lecture  itself,  and  still  more  ex- 
plicitly, as  heretofore  noticed,  by  many  of  the  most  zealous  op- 
ponents of  a  protective  tariff,  that  duties  and  restrictions  may 
be  laid  on  imports  by  virtue  of  the  power  to  regulate  foreign 
commerce,  as  eucouragements  of  navigation  and  ship-building, 

vol.  iv.  16 


242 


WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 


of  articles  for  public  defence,  and  as  retaliating  and  counter- 
vailing the  discriminations  and  restrictions  of  foreign  nations 
against  our  vessels  and  the  articles  of  commerce  conveyed  by 
them.  Yet  neither  of  these  exercises  of  power  is  specially 
named  in  the  grant  "to  regulate  commerce  with  foreign  na- 
tions." And  it  is  worthy  of  special  remark,  that  this  retaliating 
or  countervailing  power  is  far  less  familiar  in  the  practice  of 
nations  than  the  simple  power  to  encourage  domestic  products 
by  commercial  regulations,  and  especially  by  duties  on  imports. 
How  is  it  possible  to  define  the  scope  of  the  regulating  power 
without  either  limiting  it  to  the  ports  of  entry  and  clearance, 
and  other  particulars  affecting  the  vessels  and  their  crews,  or 
extending  the  power  to  the  articles  composing  the  cargoes, 
which,  in  fact,  constitute  the  commerce  itself?  and  how  can 
they  be  regulated,  or  when  have  they  been  regulated,  either  by 
laws  or  treaties,  without  including  a  reference  to  the  effect  of 
the  regulation  on  the  product  of  the  article  exchanged? 

Examine  the  commercial  codes  of  all  nations,  and  the  com- 
mercial treaties  forming  or  enacted  into  regulations  of  foreign 
commerce,  and  it  will  be  seen  at  once  that  the  most  important 
parts  of  them  describe  the  articles  to  be  exchanged  between  the 
parties,  with  the  rate  of  duties  on  them,  and  that  this  is  done 
principally  with  reference  to  the  effect  of  the  regulations  on 
their  respective  products,  particularly  the  manufactured  branch 
of  them.  Examples  might  easily  be  multiplied.  See  treaty  of 
1786  between  France  and  Great  Britain. 

After  all,  we  must  be  guided  in  expounding  "  the  power  to 
regulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations  "  by  the  intention  of 
those  who  framed,  or,  rather,  who  adopted  the  Constitution; 
and  must  decide  that  intention  by  the  meaning  attached  to  the 
terms  by  the  "  usus"  which  is  the  arUtrium,  the  jus  and  the 
norma  loquendl,  a  rule  as  applicable  to  phrases  as  to  single 
words.  It  need  scarcely  to  be  observed  that,  according  to  this 
rule,  the  intention,  if  ascertained  by  contemporaneous  interpre- 
tation and  continued  practice,  could  not  be  overruled  by  any 
latter  meaning  put  on  the  phrase,  however  warranted  by  the 
o-rammatical  rules  of  construction  were  these  at  variance  with  it. 


1832.  LETTERS.  243 

To  this  test,  the  intention  of  the  parties  to  the  Constitution, 
the  lecture  may  be  considered  as  making  the  appeal  in  the  fol- 
lowing paragraph: 

''The  power  to  regulate  commerce,  like  all  other  grants  of 
power  contained  in  the  Constitution,  must  be  construed  accord- 
ing to  the  intention  of  the  parties  to  the  compact,  to  be  ascer- 
tained by  fin?  terms  employed  to  express  this  particular  grant, 
by  the  context  of  the  instrument,  and  by  the  general  objects  and 
character  of  the  Federal  Government.  That  intention,  so  far 
as  it  can  be  thus  ascertained,  we  shall  find  to  be  unequivocally 
adverse  to  the  construction  of  this  power,  under  which  is  claimed 
the  right  to  encourage  domestic  manufactures." 

To  the  inference  that  the  intention  of  the  parties  to  the  Con- 
stitution will  be  found  to  be  unequivocally  adverse  to  the  power 
of  encouraging  domestic  manufactures,  may  be  opposed  the  fol- 
lowing considerations : 

All  commercial  and  manufacturing  nations  had  been,  and  then 
were,  in  the  practice  of  imposing  duties  and  restrictions  on  im- 
ported manufactures,  as  a  protection  and  encouragement  of  their 
own.  It  is  true  that  the  Government  of  those  nations  had  other 
powers  which  the  Government  of  the  United  States  had  not. 
But  it  is  not  less  true  that  it  was  by  the  exercise  of  that  partic- 
ular power,  the  power  to  regulate  commerce  with  other  nations, 
as  embracing  the  object  of  protecting  domestic  products,  that 
duties  and  restrictions  were  imposed  on  the  articles  imported. 

In  no  nation  was  the  usage  more  constant  than  in  Great 
Britain,  the  parent  both  of  our  common  and  our  commercial 
language. 

Such  was  understood  to  be  an  appropriate  use  of  the  power 
among  the  States,  Virginia  included,  as  appears  by  her  attempts 
to  give  effect  to  it,  previous  to  the  surrender  of  the  power  to 
the  Legislature  of  the  United  States.* 

That  it  was  the  intention  of  the  States  to  include  in  the  grant 
of  power  to  Congress  over  foreign  commerce  a  power  to  encour- 

*  See  letters  to  Mr.  Cabell  of  September  18  and  October  30,  1828,  a  letter  of 

J.  M.  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  of ,  and  Journal  of  the  House  of  Delegates,  and 

also  acts  of  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia. 


044  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

age  manufactures  by  a  use  of  it,  may  be  inferred  from  the  de- 
gree in  which  manufactures  had  grown  up  during  the  Revolu- 
tionary war,  and  from  the  threatened  danger  of  overwhelming 
importations  if  checked  only  by  the  inadequate  regulations  of 

commerce  by  the  manufacturing  States.  Mr.  Coxe,  an  able  and 
well-informed  author  of  a  work  entitled  Coxe's  View  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  in  the  part  written  prior  to  the  present  Constitution, 
but  as  an  argument  for,  and  in  the  prospect  of  such  an  event, 
says,  that  the  manufacturing  interest  was  then  considerable,  and 
next  in  importance  to  that  of  the  fisheries.  He  farther  allude- 
to  the  Federal  Convention,  then  meeting,  or  met,  as  promising 
what  was  wanted.  The  evidence  of  the  state  of  manufactures, 
particularly  in  Pennsylvania,  will  be  found  in  the  journals  and 
other  prints  of  the  period. 

That  the  power  of  regulating  foreign  commerce  was  expected 
to  be  given  to.  and  used  by,  Congress  in  favour  of  domestic 
manufactures,  may  be  seen  in  the  debates  in  the  Convention  of 
Massachusetts.  They  were  there  called  "  a  great  interest,"  and 
the  power  to  encourage  them  taken  for  granted  by  the  language 
used  on  both  sides  of  the  question  of  adopting  and  rejecting  the 
Constitution;  a  fair  and  uncontradicted  indication  of  the  gen- 
eral view  of  the  subject.  [See  the  case  stated  by  Mr.  Webster's 
speech  at  Pittsburg.]  In  the  earliest  debates  [see  Lloyd]  in  the 
new  Congress,  Mr.  Fitzsimmons,  a  member  from  Pennsylvania, 
and  a  high  authority  in  such  a  case,  remarks  :  "  I  observed,  Mr. 
Chairman,  by  what  the  gentlemen  have  said  who  have  spoken 
on  the  subject  before  you,  that  the  proposed  plan  of  revenue  is 
viewed  by  them  as  a  temporary  system,  to  bo  continued  only 
until  proper  materials  are  brought  forward  and  arranged  in 
more  perfect  form.  I  confess,  sir,  that  I  carry  my  views  on 
this  subject  much  farther  ;  that  I  earnestly  wish  such  a  one, 
which,  in  its  operation,  will  bo  some  way  adequate  to  our  pre- 
sent situation,  as  it  respects  our  agriculture  or  manufactures, 
and  our  commerce. 

"  An  honorable  gentleman  (Mr.  Lawrence)  has  expressed  an 
opinion,  that  an  enumeration  of  articles  will  operate  to  confuse 
the  business.     So  far  am  I  from  seeing  it  in  this  point  of  view. 


1832.  LETTERS.  245 

that,  on  the  contrary,  I  conceive  it  will  tend  to  facilitate  it. 
Does  not  every  gentleman  discover  that,  when  a  particulai 
article  is  offered  to  the  consideration  of  the  committee,  he  will 
be  better  able  to  give  his  opinion  upon  it  than  on  an  aggregate 
question  ?  because  the  partial  and  convenient  impost  laid  on 
such  article  by  individual  States  is  more  or  less  known  to  every 
member  in  the  commit  lee.  It  is  also  well  known,  that  the 
amount  of  such  revenue  is  more  accurately  calculated  and  better 
to  be  relied  on,  because  of  the  certainty  of  collection,  less  being 
left  to  the  officers  employed  in  bringing  it  forward  to  the  public 
treasury. 

"  It  being  my  opinion  that  an  enumeration  of  articles  will 
tend  to  clear  away  difficulties,  I  wish  as  many  to  be  selected  as 
possible  ;  for  this  reason  I  have  prepared  myself  with  an  addi- 
tional number,  which  I  wish  subjoined  to  those  already  men- 
tioned in  the  motion  on  your  table  ;  among  these  are  some  cal- 
culated to  encourage  the  productions  of  our  country,  and  protect 
our  infant  manufactures,  besides  others  tending  to  operate  as 
sumptuary  restrictions  upon  articles  which  are  often  termed 
those  of  luxury." 

By  another  member  (Mr.  Hartley)  it  was  remarked,  that 
"  The  business  before  the  House  is  certainly  of  very  great  im- 
portance, and  worthy  of  strict  attention.  I  have  observed,  sir, 
from  the  conversation  of  the  members,  that  it  is  in  the  contem- 
plation of  some  to  enter  on  this  business  in  a  limited  and  partial 
manner,  as  it  relates  to  revenue  alone;  but,  for  my  own  part, 
I  wish  to  do  it  on  as  broad  a  bottom  as  is  at  this  time  practica- 
ble. The  observations  of  the  honorable  gentleman  from  South 
Carolina  (Mr.  Tucker)  may  have  weight  in  some  future  stage 
of  the  business,  for  the  article  of  tunnage  will  not  probably  be 
determined  for  several  days,  before  which  time  his  colleagues 
may  arrive  and  be  consulted  in  the  manner  he  wishes;  but 
surely  no  argument  derived  from  that  principle  can  operate  to 
discourage  the  committee  from  taking  such  measures  as  will 
tend  to  protect  and  promote  our  domestic  manufactures. 

"If  we  consult  the  history  of  the  ancient  world,  we  shall  see 
that  they  have  thought  proper,  for  a  long  time  past,  to  give 


246  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

great  encouragement  to  establish  manufactures,  by  laying  such 
partial  duties  on  the  importation  of  foreign  goods  as  to  give 
the  home  manufactures  a  considerable  advantage  in  the  price 
when  brought  to  market.  It  is  also  well  known  to  the  com- 
mittee, that  there  are  many  articles  that  will  bear  a  higher  duty 
than  others,  which  are  to  remain  in  the  common  mass,  and  be 
taxed  with  a  certain  impost  ad  valorem;  from  this  view  of  the 
subject,  I  think  it  both  politic  and  just  that  the  fostering  hand 
of  the  General  Government  should  extend  to  all  those  manufac- 
tures which  will  tend  to  national  utility.  I  am  therefore  sorry 
that  the  gentlemen  seem  to  fix  their  minds  to  so  early  a  period 
as  1783,  for  we  very  well  know  our  circumstances  are  much 
changed  since  that  time.  We  had  then  but  few  manufactures 
among  us,  and  the  vast  quantities  of  goods  that  flowed  in  upon 
us  from  Europe  at  the  conclusion  of  the  war,  rendered  those  few 
almost  useless;  since  then,  we  have  been  forced  by  necessity  and 
various  other  causes  to  increase  our  domestic  manufactures  to 
such  a  degree  as  to  be  able  to  furnish  some  insufficient  quantity 
to  answer  the  consumption  of  the  whole  Union,  while  others 
are  daily  growing  into  importance.  Our  stock  of  materials  is 
in  many  instances  equal  to  the  greatest  demand,  and  our  arti- 
sans sufficient  to  work  them  even  up  for  exportation;  in  these 
cases  I  think  it  to  be  the  policy  of  every  enlightened  nation  to 
give  their  manufactures  that  degree  of  encouragement  necessary 
to  perfect  them,  without  oppressing  the  other  parts  of  the  com- 
munity; and  under  this  encouragement  the  industry  of  the  man- 
ufacturer will  be  employed  to  add  to  the  wealth  of  the  nation." 

A  farther  evidence  of  the  general  anticipation  is  found  in  the 
petitions  from  manufacturers  addressed  to  Congress  at  the  first 
opportunity  that  occurred.     [See  Mr.  Webster,  as  above.] 

But  a  proof  not  to  be  resisted,  that  the  power  to  encourage 
domestic  products  by  duties  on  imports  was  intended  to  be 
granted  to  Congress,  is  not  only  the  use  made  of  the  power  at 
their  first  session  under  the  new  Constitution,  but  a  continued 
use  of  it  for  a  period  of  forty  years,  with  the  express  sanction 
of  the  executive  and  judicial  departments,  and  with  the  positive 
concurrence  or  manifest  acquiescence  of  the  State  authorities 


1832.  LETTERS. 


•2l~ 


and  of  the  people  at  large,  with  a  very  limited  exception  during 
a  few  late  years. 

It  deserves  particular  attention,  that  the  Congress  which  first 
met  contained  sixteen  members,  eight  of  them  in  the  House  of 
Representatives,""  fresh  from  the  Convention  which  framed  the 
Constitution,  and  a  considerable  number  who  had  been  members 
of  the  State  Conventions  which  had  adopted  it,  taken  as  Avell 
from  the  party  which  opposed  as  from  those  who  had  espoused 
its  adoption.     Yet  it  appears  from  the  debates  in  the  House  of 
Representatives,  (those  in  the  Senate  not  having  been  taken,) 
that  not  a  doubt  was  started  of  the  power  of  Congress  to  im- 
pose duties  on  imports  for  the  encouragement  of  domestic  man- 
ufactures.    It  is  not  unworthy  of  farther  notice,  that  proposi- 
tions of  that  character  were  made  by  three  members  from  Vir- 
ginia; by  one  of  a  duty  on  coals,  in  favour  of  her  coal-pits;  by 
another  of  a  duty  on  hemp,  to  encourage  the  growth  of  the  arti- 
cle;    and  by  a  third,  a  prohibition  of  beef,  in  favour  of  Ameri- 
can graziers;  a  duty  being  proposed  at  the  same  time  by  a 
member  from  South  Carolina  on  hemp,  as  a  proper  encourage- 
ment to  the  culture  of  the  article  in  the  suitable  soil  and  climate 
of  that  State.     None  of  these  propositions   appears  to  have  had 
revenue  in  view;  and  that  as  to  beef,  of  course,  excluded  reve- 
nue.    If  any  doubt  on  the  point  of  constitutionality  had  existed, 
these  propositions,  though  not  agreed  to,  could  not  have  failed 
to  call  forth  an  expression  of  it.     Add  to  all  this  that  the  pre- 
amble to  the  bill,  as  it  passed  into  a  law,  contained  an  express 
avowal  that  the  encouragement  of  manufactures  was  an  object 
of  the  tariff  imposed  by  it,  and  that  General  Washington,  who 
was  president  of  the  Convention  and  signed  the  Constitution, 
signed  the  bill  as  President  of  the  United  States.     It  has  been 
alleged  that  this  particular  clause  was  not  repeated  in  any  suc- 
ceeding preamble  to  a  like  law;  and  that  the  omission  amounted 
to  a  silent  disavowal  of  the  precedent.     The  inference  would 
be  a  very  fair  one,  if  the  fact  on  which  it  rests  had  not  been  un- 


*  Nicholas  Gilman,  Elbridge  Gerry,  Roger  Sherman,  George  Clymer.  Thomas 
Fitzsiuiuions,  Daniel  Carroll,  James  Madison,  Jr.,  Abraham  Baldwin. 


248  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

true,  fov  in  an  act  of  the  following  year  the  same  clause  is  in- 
serted in  the  preamble;  and  if  true,  the  inference  would  have 
been  met  by  another  fact,  that  Congress  soon  discontinued  pre- 
ambles to  their  statutes  as  sources  of  dilatory  discussion,  leav- 
ing the  enactments  to  speak  for  themselves. 

What  stronger  contemporaneous  evidence  could  be  required 
than  is  here  given  of  the  meaning  attached  by  the  Federal 
Legislature,  at  the  outset  of  the  Government,  and  with  the  best 
means  of  knowing  that  attached  by  the  Federal  Convention,  to 
the  power  of  regulating  commerce  with  foreign  nations,  while 
it  is  not  denied  that,  for  thirty  years,  that  meaning,  as  including 
the  encouragement  of  manufactures,  was  not  drawn  into  ques- 
tion; that,  when  so  drawn,  it  was  constantly  decided  by  major- 
ities in  the  Legislature  in  favour  of  the  constitutionality  of  the 
power;  and  few,  if  any,  will  allege  that  there  ever  has  been  a 
time  when  majorities,  both  of  the  States  and  of  the  people,  were 
not  of  opinion  that  the  power  existed. 

With  respect  to  the  Executive  department,  it  appears  that 
every  President,  from  Washington  to  the  present  inclusive,  con- 
curred in  the  legislative  construction  of  the  Constitution.  For 
the  reiterated  and  emphatic  proofs,  let  me  refer  to  the  extracts 
from  Executive  messages  appended  to  the  letters  of  J.  Madison 
to  J.  C.  Cabell,  in  a  pamphlet  published  in  Richmond  in  1829. 
It  will  be  there  seen,  that  besides  the  messages  of  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son, the  great  weight  of  whose  name  has  been  so  loudly  claimed 
for  the  adverse  construction,  his  very  able  and  elaborate  re- 
ports, when  Secretary  of  State,  on  the  fisheries  and  on  foreign 
commerce,  inculcated  the  policy  of  exercising  the  protective 
power,  without  indicating  the  slightest  doubt  of  its  constitu- 
tionality. Nay,  more,  it  will  be  seen,  that  in  addition  to  these 
high  official  sanctions  to  it,  his  correspondence,  when  out  of  of- 
fice and  at  leisure  to  review  his  opinions,  shows  that  he  adhered 
to  the  protective  principle  and  policy,  without  any  doubt  on  the 
point  of  constitutional  authority.  In  the  scale  opposed  to  all 
this  evidence,  given  at  different  periods  of  his  long  life  and 
under  varied  circumstances,  has  been  but  a  brief  passage  in 
a  letter  written  a  few  months  before  his  death  to  Mr.  Giles, 


1832.  LETTERS.  249 

which  docs  not  necessarily  imply  any  change  of  opinion;  on  the 
contrary,  by  referring  the  one  there  expressed  to  an  erroneous 
and  "  indefinite  "  abuse  of  power,  in  the  case  of  the  tariff  equiv- 
alent to  a  usurpation  of  power,  any  appearance  of  inconsistency 
might  be  avoided. 

Of  the  sanctions  given  to  the  constitutionality  of  the  protect- 
ive power  by  the  Judiciary  department,  it  would  be  superfluous 
to  speak. 

If  all  these  authoritative  interpretations  of  the  Constitution 
on  a  particular  point  cannot  settle  its  meaning  and  the  intention 
of  its  authors,  we  can  never  have  a  stable  and  known  Constitu- 
tion. A  new  one  may  be  made  by  every  new  Congress;  while 
a  like  disregard  by  the  Judiciary  department  of  its  own  delib- 
erate practice  would  have  a  like  effect  in  setting  afloat  the  laws 
also,  and  producing  that  instability  which  is  incompatible  with 
good  government,  and  has  been  the  reproach  and  downfal  of 
too  many  popular  Governments. 

If  an  acknowledged,  a  uniform,  and  a  long-continued  practice 
under  written  constitutions  and  laws  cannot  settle  their  mean- 
ing, the  preposterous  result  would  be,  that  the  longer  the  period 
of  practice  the  greater  would  be  the  liability  to  new  construc- 
tions of  them,  from  the  effect  of  time  in  changing  the  meaning 
of  words  and  phrases.  What  inroads  would  be  made  in  a  code 
if  the  ancient  statutes  were  to  be  read  through  the  modern  mean- 
ing of  their  phraseology?  Some  of  the  terms  of  the  Federal 
Constitution  have  already  undergone  perceptible  deviations 
from  their  original  import. 

It  has  been  argued  against  the  authority  of  the  precedents 
regularly  continued  for  thirty  or  forty  years,  that  the  true  char- 
acter of  a  political  system  might  not  be  disclosed  even  within 
such  a  period.  But  this  would  not  disprove  the  intention  of 
those  who  made  the  Constitution.  It  would  show  only  that  it 
was  made  liable  to  abuses  not  foreseen  nor  soon  to  appear;  and 
that  it  ought  to  be  amended,  but  by  the  authority  which  made 
it,  not  by  the  authority  subordinate  to  it;  by  the  creator,  not  by 
the  creature  of  the  Constitution. 

It  cannot  be  admitted  that,  in  ascertaining  the  controverted 


250  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

meaning  of  the  constitutional  "  power  to  regulate  commerce 
with  foreign  nations,"  no  regard  ought  to  be  had  to  the  consid- 
eration, that,  if  the  power  to  protect  domestic  products  be  not 
in  Congress,  it  is  extinguished  in  the  United  States;  a  nation 
already,  in  some  degree,  a  manufacturing  one,  with  a  certainty 
of  becoming  deeply  interested  in  that  branch  of  industry,  and 
consequently  needing  the  protective  armour  against  the  hostile 
policy  of  other  nations. 

The  powers  of  government  in  our  political  system  arc  divided 
between  the  States  in  their  united  capacity  and  in  their  individ- 
ual capacities.  The  powers,  taken  together,  ought  to  be  equal 
to  all  the  objects  of  Government,  not  specially  excepted  for 
special  reasons,  as  in  case  of  duties  on  exports;  or  not  inconsist- 
ent with  the  principles  of  Republican  Government.  The  pre- 
sumption, therefore,  must  be  a  violent  one,  that  a  power  for  the 
encouragement  of  domestic  manufactures  was  meant  to  be  in- 
cluded in  the  power  vested  in  Congress  "  to  regulate  commerce 
with  foreign  nations,"  as  exercised  by  all  nations  for  that  pur- 
pose, unless  it  be  left  in  an  adequate  form  with  the  individual 
States.  The  question  then  is,  whether  the  power  has  been  so 
left  with  the  States;  and  it  seems  to  be  admitted  by  all,  that  it 
has  been  taken  from  them,  if  not  reserved  to  them,  by  the  tenth 
section  of  article  first  of  the  Constitution.  Now,  apart  from 
the  indication  on  the  face  of  the  Journal  of  the  Federal  Con- 
vention, that  the  power  reserved  in  that  section  was  a  limited 
one  for  local  purposes,  it  may  be  affirmed  without  hesitation, 
that  the  States  individually  could  not  if  they  would,  and  would 
not  if  they  could,  exercise  it  for  the  encouragement  of  their  man- 
ufactures. They  could  not,  because  the  imported  articles  being 
less  burdened  in  the  other  States,  would  find  their  way  from  and 
through  the  adjoining  States,  and  defeat  the  object;  and  they 
would  not  if  they  could,  because  the  money  accruing  from  the 
consumption  of  the  articles  would  be  paid,  not  into  the  State, 
but  into  the  National  Treasury,  while  the  cost  of  guarding  and 
enforcing  the  collection  would  exceed  the  advantage  of  the  man- 
ufacture; and  the  advantage  itself,  if  attained,  would  be,  in  a 
manner,  common  to  all  the  States.    The  result,  however,  on  the 


1832.  LETTERS.  251 

whole,  would  be,  that  the  State  making  the  attempt  would  lose 
the  commerce  in  the  article  without  gaining  the  manufacture 
of  it. 

The  incapacity  of  the  States  separately  to  regulate  their  for- 
eign commerce  was  fully  illustrated  by  an  experience  which  was 
well  known  to  the  Federal  Convention  when  forming  the  Con- 
stitution. It  was  well  known  that  the  incapacity  gave  a  pri- 
mary and  powerful  impulse  to  the  transfer  of  the  power  to  a 
common  authority  capable  of  exercising  it  with  effect.  It  may 
be  confidently  foretold,  that  if,  as  has  been  proposed,  Congress 
should  grant  a  general  consent  to  the  States  to  impose  duties 
on  imports  in  favour  of  their  domestic  manufactures,  and  any 
State  should  avail  itself  of  the  consent,  the  experiment  would 
never  be  repeated  by  the  same  nor  the  example  be  followed  by 
any  other  State. 

It  is  true,  that  certain  States  having  peculiar  advantages  for 
foreign  commerce,  might  levy  both  on  their  non-importing  neigh- 
bours and  on  themselves  a  very  limited  impost,  without  throw- 
ing the  trade  into  other  channels,  and  be  able  so  far  to  encour- 
age their  domestic  manufactures.  But  as  such  an  object  would 
not  fail  to  arouse  the  indignation  of  the  suffering  States,  it  can- 
not be  doubted  that  the  revision  and  control  expressly  reserved 
to  Congress  would  be  at  once  interposed  to  arrest  the  griev- 
ance. Xcw  York,  Pennsylvania,  Rhode  Island,  and  Virginia, 
previous  to  the  establishment  of  the  present  Constitution,  had 
opportunities  of  taxing  the  consumption  of  their  neighbours, 
and  the  exasperating  effect  on  them  formed  a  conspicuous  chap- 
ter in  the  history  of  the  period.  The  grievance  would  now  be 
extended  to  the  inland  States,  which  necessarily  receive  their 
foreign  supplies  through  the  maritime  States,  and  would  be 
heard  in  a  voice  to  which  a  deaf  ear  would  not  be  turned. 

The  condition  of  the  inland  States  is  of  itself  a  sufficient  proof 
that  it  could  not  be  the  intention  of  those  who  framed  the  Con- 
stitution to  substitute  for  a  power  in  Congress  to  impose  a  pro- 
tective tariff,  a  power  merely  to  permit  the  States  individually 
to  do  it.  Although  the  present  inland  States  were  not  then  in 
existence,  it  could  not  escape  foresight  that  it  would  soon,  and 


252  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

from  time  to  time,  be  the  case.  Kentucky  was  then  known  to 
be  making  ready  to  be  an  independent  State,  and  to  become  a 
member  of  the  Confederacy.  What  is  now  Tennessee  was 
marked  by  decided  circumstances  for  the  same  distinction.  On 
the  north  side  of  the  Ohio  new  States  were  in  embryo  under  the 
arrangements  and  auspices  of  the  Revolutionary  Congress,  and 
it  was  manifest,  that  within  the  Federal  domain  others  would 
be  added  to  the  Federal  family. 

As  the  anticipated  States  would  be  without  ports  for  foreign 
commerce,  it  would  be  a  mockery  to  provide  for  them  a  permit 
to  impose  duties  on  imports  or  exports  in  favour  of  manufac- 
tures, and  the  mockery  would  be  the  greater  as  the  obstructions 
and  difficulties  in  the  way  of  their  bulky  exports  might  the 
sooner  require  domestic  substitutes  for  imports;  and  a  protec- 
tion for  the  substitutes,  by  commercial  regulations,  which  could 
not  avail  if  not  general  in  their  operation  and  enforced  by  a 
general  authority.  Even  at  this  time,  notwithstanding  the  fa- 
cilities of  steamboats,  canals,  and  railroads,  there  remains  for 
much  of  the  inland  portion  of  the  United  States  an  extent  of 
transportation,  in  some  cases  a  terraqueous  one,  rendering  the 
expense  of  exchanging  their  exports  for  imports  a  motive  for 
manufacturing  efforts,  which  need  for  their  infancy,  and  against 
contingencies,  the  shield  of  Federal  protection. 

But  those  who  regard  the  permission  grantable  in  section  ten, 
article  one,  to  the  States  to  impose  duties  on  foreign  commerce, 
as  an  intended  substitute  for  a  general  power  in  Congress,  do 
not  reflect  that  the  object  of  the  permission,  qualified  as  it  is, 
might  be  less  inconsistently  explained  by  supposing  it  a  concur- 
rent or  supplemental  power,  than  by  supposing  it  a  substituted 
power. 

Finally,  it  cannot  be  alleged  that  the  encouragement  of  manu- 
factures permissible  to  the  States  by  duties  on  foreign  commerce, 
is  to  be  regarded  as  an  incident  to  duties  imposed  for  revenue. 
Such  a  view  of  the  section  is  barred  by  the  fact  that  revenue 
cannot  be  the  object  of  the  State,  the  duties  accruing,  not  to  tho 
State,  but  to  the  United  States.  The  duties  also  would  even 
diminish,  not  increase,  the  gain  of  the  federal  treasury,  by  di« 


1832.  LETTERS.  253 

ruinisliing  the  consumption  of  imports  within  the  States  imposing 
the  duties,  and,  of  course,  the  aggregate  revenue  of  the  United 
States.  The  revenue, -whatever  it  mighl  be,  could  only  be  re- 
garded as  an  incident  to  the  manufacturing  object,  not  this  to 
ihc  revenue. 

Under  no  aspect  of  the  subject  can  the  clause  in  question 
favour  the  idea  that  it  was  meant  to  provide  a  substitute  for  a 
national  power  to  protect  domestic  manufactures  by  duties  on 
foreign  commerce;  and  consequently,  that  if  the  power  be  not 
included  in  the  power  vested  in  Congress,  the  United  States 
would  be  a  solitary  example  of  a  nation  disarming  itself  of  the 
power  altogether. 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  show,  from  the  journal  of  the 
Convention  of  1787,  that  it  was  intended  to  withhold  from 
Congress  a  power  to  protect  manufactures  by  commercial  regu- 
lations. The  intention  is  inferred  from  the  rejection  or  not 
adopting  of  particular  propositions  which  embraced  a  power  to 
encourage  them.  But,  without  knowing  the  reasons  for  the 
votes  in  those  cases,  no  such  inference  can  be  sustained.  The 
propositions  might  be  disapproved  because  they  were  in  a  bad 
form  or  not  in  order;  because  they  blended  other  powers  with 
the  particular  power  in  question;  or  because  the  object  had 
been,  or  would  be,  elsewhere  provided  for.  No  one  acquainted 
with  the  proceedings  of  deliberative  bodies  can  have  failed  to 
notice  the  frequent  uncertainty  of  inferences  from  a  record  of 
naked  votes.  It  has  been  seen  with  some  surprise,  that  a  failure 
or  final  omission  of  a  proposition  "to  establish  public  institu- 
tions, rewards,  and  immunities  for  the  promotion  of  agriculture, 
commerce,  and  manufactures,"  should  have  led  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  Convention  meant  to  exclude  from  the  federal  power 
over  commerce  regulations  encouraging  domestic  manufactures. 
[See  Mr.  Crawford's  letter  to  Mr.  Dickerson,  in  the  National 

Intelligencer  of .]     Surely  no  disregard  of  a  proposition 

embracing  public  institutions,  reivards,  and  immunities  for  the 
'promotion  of  agriculture,  commerce,  and  manufactures,  could  be 
an  evidence  of  a  refusal  to  encourage  the  particular  object  of 
manufactures,  by  the  particular  mode  of  duties  or  restrictions 
on  rival  imports.    In  expounding  the  Constitution  and  deducing 


254  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

the  intention  of  its  framers,  it  should  never  be  forgotten,  that 
the  great  object  of  the  Convention  was  to  provide,  by  a  new 
Constitution,  a  remedy  for  the  defects  of  the  existing  one;  that 
among  these  defects  was  that  of  a  power  to  regulate  foreign 
commerce;  that  in  all  nations,  this  regulating  power  embraced 
the  protection  of  domestic  manufactures  by  duties  and  restric- 
tions on  imports;  that  the  States  had  tried  in  vain  to  make  use 
of  the  power,  while  it  remained  with  them;  and  that,  if  taken 
from  them  and  transferred  to  the  Federal  Government,  with  an 
exception  of  the  power  to  encourage  domestic  manufactures,  the 
American  people,  let  it  be  repeated,  present  the  solitary  and 
strange  spectacle  of  a  nation  disarming  itself  of  a  power  exer- 
cised by  every  nation  as  a  shield  against  the  effect  of  the  power 
as  used  by  other  nations.  Who  will  say  that  such  considera- 
tions as  these  are  not  among  the  best  keys  that  can  be  applied 
to  the  text  of  the  Constitution?  and  infinitely  better  keys  than 
unexplained  votes  cited  from  the  records  of  the  Convention. 

It  has  been  asked  for  what  purpose,  other  than  the  encour- 
agement of  manufactures,  the  consent  of  Congress  was  grantable 
to  the  States  to  impose  duties  on  exports  and  imports;  and  here 
the  answer  is  easily  given,  and  perfectly  satisfies  the  language 
of  the  Constitution.  The  object  was  such  improvement  in  har- 
bours and  other  cases,  having,  like  their  inspection  laws,  rela- 
tion to  their  maritime  commerce,  as  particular  States  might 
have  a  local  interest  in  making  apart  from,  or  in  addition  to, 
federal  provisions.  That  this  was  understood  to  be  the  mean- 
ing of  the  clause,  is  demonstrated  by  the  early,  continued,  and 
only  use  made  of  the  power  granted  by  Congress.  It  appears 
from  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  that,  beginning  with  the 
year  1790,  and  previous  to  the  year  1815  *  the  consent  of  Con- 
gress, on  applications  from  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  Penn- 

*  See  Acts  of  Congress,  August  11,  1790;  January  10,  1791;  February  9,  1791; 
March  19,  1792;  June  9,  1794;  March  2,  1795;  May  12,  1796;  March  27,  1798; 
March  17,  1800;  February  27,  1801;  April  14,  1802;  March  16,  1804;  March  1, 
1805;  February  28,  1800;  March  28,  1806;  April  20,  1808;  June  15,  1809; 
March  2,  1811;  March  2,  1813;  April  16,  1814.  There  has  not  been  an  oppor- 
tunity of  consulting  the  laws  of  Congress  subsequent  to  1815,  nor  any  of  the 
State  laws  making  application  to  Congress.  It  is  presumed  that  nothing  in  either 
would  affect  the  view  here  taken  of  the  subject. 


1832.  LETTERS.  255 

sylvania,  Maryland,  Virginia,  South  Carolina,  and  Georgia,  was 
in  pursuance  of  the  tenth  section,  article  one,  of  the  Constitution, 
granted  or  renewed  in  not  less  than  twenty  instances  for  State 
duties,  to  defray  the  expense  of  cleaning  out  harbours  or  rivers, 
erecting  piers  or  light-houses,  or  appointing  health-officers,  with- 
out a  single  instance  through  a  period  of  more  than  twenty  years, 
and  it  may  now  be  said,  of  more  than  forty  years,  of  an  appli- 
cation for  the  purpose  of  encouraging  State  manufactures.  Nor, 
for  reasons  heretofore  given,  is  there  the  least  probability  that 
such  an  application  ever  will  be  made,  or,  if  made,  receive  the 
assent  of  Congress.  The  assent  could  not  be  desired  unless  by 
a  State  which,  like  New  York,  Rhode  Island,  Virginia,  or  South 
Carolina,  might  possess  such  peculiar  local  advantages  for  for- 
eign commerce  as  would  admit  duties  to  a  small  extent,  without 
throwing  its  trade  into  other  channels.  But  the  effect  of  such 
duties  on  the  neighboring  States  would,  if  not  preventing  the 
consent  of  Congress,  lead  at  once,  as  heretofore  observed,  to 
the  demand  of  its  recall  by  the  suffering  party.  It  need  not  be 
repeated,  that  to  guard  against  this  evil  was  a  material  object 
in  the  exchange  of  the  old  for  the  new  federal  system.  New 
Jersey  did  not  accede  to  the  old  without  a  protest  against  that 
defect  in  it ;  and  it  appears  from  the  printed  journal  of  the 
Convention  (page  369,)  that  New  Hampshire,  New  Jersey,  and 
Delaware,  which  carried  on  their  foreign  commerce  through  the 
ports  of  other  States,  voted  against  a  power  in  the  States  to 
impose  duties,  though  requiring  the  previous  consent,  and  sub- 
ject to  the  subsequent  revision,  of  Congress;  so  jealous  were 
they  of  the  power  under  which  they  had  smarted. 

A  passage  is  cited  from  the  Federalist,  No.  xlv,  excluding, 
by  its  description  of  the  powers  of  the  Federal  Government  [as 
few  and  of  an  external  character,]  the  power  to  encourage  do- 
mestic manufactures.  The  passage  is  in  the  following  words: 
"  The  powers  delegated  to  the  Federal  Government  are  few  and 
defined,  and  will  be  exercised  principally  on  external  objects, 
as  war,  peace,  negotiation,  and  foreign  commerce.  The  powers 
reserved  to  the  several  States  will  extend  to  all  the  objects 
which,  in  the  ordinary  course  of  affairs,  concern  the  lives,  liber- 


256  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

ties,  and  properties  of  the  people,  and  t ho  internal  order,  im- 
provement, and  prosperity  of  the  State." 

The  stress  laid  on  the  passage  is  at  least  vastly  dispropor- 
tionate to  its  importance.  It  is  evident  that  the  writer  was 
taking  a  general  and  glancing  notice  only  of  the  partition  of 
power  between  the  Federal  and  State  governments,  the  less  ox- 
posed  to  be  misunderstood  or  criticised,  as  the  constitutional 
powers  of  the  former  had  been  detailed  in  a  review  of  them  in 
several  numbers  immediately  preceding  No.  xlv.  But  there  is 
nothing  in  the  passage  that  can  affect  the  question  of  a  protect- 
ive tariff,  derived  from  the  power  of  regulating  commerce  with 
foreign  nations,  which  is  one  of  the  powers  named  in  the  pas- 
sage as  of  an  internal  character.  The  simple  question,  there- 
fore, to  be  decided,  is,  whether  the  protective  power  be  em- 
braced by  the  regulating  power. 

That  the  enumerated  powers  of  the  Federal  Government  are 
few,  when  compared  with  the  mass  of  State  powers,  is  certain. 
That  the  powers  of  "war,  peace,  negotiation,  or  treaties,  and 
foreign  commerce,"  particularly  as  a  main  source  of  revenue, 
will  be  principally  the  objects  of  federal  legislation,  is  proved 
by  the  statute-book;  and  that  the  word  principally  implies  and 
leaves  room  for  other  powers,  not  of  an  external  character,  is 
sufficiently  obvious;  besides  that,  the  commerce,  though  external 
in  its  character,  operates,  as  we  have  seen,  internally  as  well  as 
externally. 

It  must  be  confessed,  that  the  classification  of  constitutional 
powers  into  external  and  internal,  though  often  used  to  express 
the  division  between  federal  and  State  powers,  is  liable  to  too 
many  exceptions  to  be  a  safe  guide,  without  keeping  the  excep- 
tions in  view.  Not  only  do  the  federal  powers,  which  have 
been  referred  to  as  external,  operate  internally,  but  some  of  the 
internal  powers,  whether  exercised  by  the  one  government  or 
the  other,  have  also  an  external  operation.  Excises  or  direct 
taxes  on  vending  of  imports,  if  employed  by  the  State  author- 
ities, must  have  a  bearing  on  imports  or  exports,  as  real  and 
material  as  duties  imposed  on  them.  On  the  other  hand,  cer- 
tain federal  powers  have  an  operation  altogether  internal,  as  in 


1832.  LETTERS. 


257 


the  case  of  the  post  office,  direct  taxes,  &c.  Occasionally  the 
definition  of  the  federal  power  is  extended  to  the  relations  with 
and  between  the  States,  as  well  as  to  the  relations  with  foreign 
nations.  But  the  definition  is  still  defective.  Questions  arising 
under  a  bankrupt  law,  and  under  State  laws  violating  contracts, 
though  between  citizens  of  the  same  State,  arc  within  the  federal 
jurisdiction. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  is  truly  sui  generis; 
and  in  expounding  it,  the  delineation  and  distribution  of  power 
on  the  face  of  it  must  never  be  overlooked. 

It  is  asked  "whether,  as  the  power  to  regulate  commerce  be- 
tween the  States  is  in  the  same  words  with  that  to  regulate  it 
with  foreign  nations,  it  would  not  necessarily  follow,  if  Con- 
gress could  impose  duties  to  protect  American  industry  against 
foreign  competition,  that  Congress  might  impose  them  for  the 
purpose  of  protecting  the  industry  and  productions  of  the  States 
against  the  competition  of  each  other."  Waiving  the  constitu- 
tional obstacles  presented  by'the  communion  of  rights  and  priv- 
ileges among  citizens  of  different  States,  the  difficulties,  the  in- 
utility, and  the  odium  of  such  a  project  would  be  a  sufficient  se- 
curity against  it;  abetter  security  than  can  be  found  against 
abuses  incident  to  most  of  the  powers  vested  in  every  Govern- 
ment. The  power  to  regulate  commerce  among  the  States  was 
well  known,  and  so  explained  by  the  advocates  of  the  Constitu- 
tion* when  before  the  people  for  their  consideration,  to  be 
meant  as  a  necessary  control  on  the  conduct  of  some  of  the  im- 
porting States  towards  their  non-importing  neighbours.  A  re- 
currence to  the  angry  legislation  produced  by  it  among  the  par- 
ties, some  of  whom  had  passed  commercial  laws  more  rigid 
against  others  than  against  foreign  nations,  will  well  account 
for  the  constitutional  remedy.  A  condensed  view  of  the  evil  is 
given  by  Mr.  Coxe  in  his  work  above  referred  to. 

In  a  marginal  note  (page  15)  it  is  pronounced,  that  "if  all 
the  nations  of  the  earth  were  at  once  to  abandon  their  commer- 
cial restrictions,  every  real  motive  on  which  ours  is  founded 

*  See  Federalist,  No.  xlii. 
VOL.   IV.  17 


25S  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

would  continue  to  operate;"  alluding  evidently  to  personal  and 
local  interests  as  the  only  motives  for  a  protective  tariff. 

Should  it  have  happened  that  acts  of  Congress  in  favour  of 
manufactures  were  sought  by  individuals  reckless  of  all  feeling 
but  the  greediness  of  gain,  and  patronised  by  representatives 
yielding  to  the  voice  of  their  constituents,  it  would  be  but  to 
suppose  that  some  of  the  manufacturers  themselves  had  honestly 
believed  that  they  were  promoting  the  public  interest  as  well 
as  their  own;  certain  it  is  that  they  were  sustained  by  not  a 
few,  who  persuaded  themselves  that  a  protective  tariff,  by 
creating  a  home  market  and  a  competition  with  foreign  manu- 
factures, would  balance  the  account  with  the  agriculturalists; 
and  by  many  of  the  most  intelligent,  independent,  uninterested, 
and  private  citizens,  who  viewed  a  tariff  within  calculated  limits 
as  a  cheap  provision  for  our  infant  and  nascent  establishments, 
enabling  them  to  take  root  and  flourish  without  the  legal  aid, 
and,  in  due  time,  more  than  repay  the  cost  of  protection  by 
the  rich  addition  to  the  resources  of  the  country,  and  a  diminu- 
tion of  its  dependence  on  foreign  supplies  of  its  wants.  Nor 
ought  it  to  have  been  overlooked,  that  a  farther  motive,  unbi- 
ased by  personal  or  local  interest,  for  espousing  a  protective 
policy,  was  furnished  by  the  frequent  occurrence  of  wars,  and 
the  effect  of  war,  in  raising  the  cost  of  foreign  supplies  beyond 
that  of  protecting,  in  time  of  peace,  domestic  substitutes.  It 
will  be  readily  admitted,  that  the  cost  of  imports  would  not 
now  be  such  as  occurred  during  our  revolutionary  war,  when 
foreign  powers  would  not  trade  with  us,  nor  during  the  war  of 
1812,  when  the  maritime  ascendency  of  one  of  them  obstructed 
the  trade  of  others  with  us.  We  have,  moreover,  a  maritime 
force  of  our  own  to  protect  our  intercourse  with  other  nations. 
Still  it  is  true,  and  always  will  be  true,  that  a  state  of  war, 
more  especially  when  our  country  is  involved  in  it,  by  raising 
the  cost  of  foreign  manufactures,  may  make  it  a  real  economy, 
a  political  adherence  to  the  rule  of  cheapness,  to  avoid  that 
cost  by  a  lesser  cost  of  fostering  our  own  in  time  of  peace.  All 
nations  regulate  their  policy  more  or  less  with  a  reference  to 
the  contingency  of  wars.     What  are  the  armies  and  fleets,  with 


1832.  LETTERS.  259 

the  costly  hoards  of  materials  for  them?  what  the  forts  and 
garrisons,  the  armories  and  arsenals,  but  so  many  peculiar  sac- 
rifices to  the  anticipated  dangers  of  war  and  invasion?  A  tariff 
of  protection,  well  calculated  as  to  its  amount  and  its  objects, 
is  within  the  purview  of  the  same  policy.  It  is  not  an  inappo- 
site reflection,  that  if  the  agitating  topic  of  the  tariff  had  arisen 
in  the  midst  of  a  war  or  with  a  war  in  prospect,  instead  of  a 
period  of  a  general  and  apparently  a  lasting  peace,  the  doc- 
trines and  discussions  which  have  been  witnessed  would  have 
materially  felt  the  influence  of  such  a  difference  in  the  state  of 
things. 

For  myself,  although  my  name  has  been  seen  on  the  ultra 
tariff  list,  I  have  adhered  to  the  doctrine  stated  in  my  letters  to 
Mr.  Cabell,  which  concurred  in  that  of  free  trade  as  a  theoretic 
rule,  and  subject  to  exceptions  only  not  inconsistent  with  the 
principle  of  it.  And  I  cannot  but  say  that  I  have  not  met  with 
any  disproof  of  the  soundness  of  such  exceptions.  Those  who 
admit  no  exception  to  the  rule,  and  those  who  multiply  the  ex- 
ceptions into  the  rule,  equally  forget  the  prudent  rule  of  avoid- 
ing extremes.  Theories  are  the  offspring  of  the  closet;  excep- 
tions to  them,  the  lessons  of  experience. 

I  am  aware  that  the  views  I  have  taken  of  the  protective 
power  are  in  opposition  to  the  dominant  opinions  in  Virginia 
as  well  as  elsewhere.  I  am  equally  aware,  that  in  the  high  de- 
gree of  excitement  in  which  those  opinions  are  involved,  reason- 
ings, however  just,  and  constitutional  investigations,  however 
instructive,  will  find  averted  eyes  and  unwilling  ears.  But  the 
most  violent  excitements  are  not  the  most  lasting.  And  a  change 
may  be  hastened  by  the  light  of  facts  forcing  themselves  on  the 
public  attention,  and  by  reflections  inseparable  from  them. 

That  a  ferment  in  the  popular  mind,  almost  beyond  example, 
should  have  been  wrought  by  means  not  less  beyond  example, 
cannot,  however  regretted,  be  wondered  at.  We  have  seen  tho 
finest  talents,  the  most  ardent  zeal,  and  the  most  captivating 
eloquence,  indefatigably  exerted  in  painting  in  the  deepest  col- 
ours all  the  sufferings,  public  and  private,  real  and  imaginary; 
and  in  inculcating  a  belief  that  the  tariff  was  the  cause,  the  sole 


2G0  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

cause  of  thorn;  that  it  had  occasioned  the  distressing  fall  in  the 
value  of  land  and  in  the  price  of  its  staple  productions;  that  it 
had  converted  Ihe  splendid  mansions  of  the  rich  into  decaying 
abodes  of  embarrassment  and  degradation;  that  it  ground  to 
dust  the  faces  of  the  poor  and  drove  them  from  their  ancient 
homes  to  look  for  better  in  the  wilderness  of  the  West;  that  it 
threw  the  whole  burden  of  taxes  on  the  Southern  planters,  who 
alone  produced  the  exports  which  paid  for  the  imports,  and  who 
alone  were  able  to  consume  the  imports  on  which  the  taxes  were 
levied;  in  a  word,  that  the  tariff,  in  its  protective  operation,  was 
a  system  of  plunder,  wresting  the  money  from  the  pockets  of  the 
Southern  agriculturalist  and  putting  it  into  the  pockets  of  the 
Northern  manufacturers. 

While  this  side  of  the  medal  was  exhibited  in  its  highest  re- 
lief, the  medal  was  never  reversed.  It  was  kept  out  of  view  that 
the  ability  of  the  planters  to  consume  was  not  a  little  reduced 
by  the  draughts  on  the  proceeds  of  their  crops  for  the  various 
purchases  in  the  West,  for  the  unprotected  manufactures  in  the 
North,  necessary,  useful,  or  convenient,  and  for  the  expense  of 
their  regular  tours  and  temporary  residences  in  northern  sec- 
tions of  the  Union.  It  was  equally  withheld  from  public  view 
that,  besides  the  registered  exports,  the  people  of  the  North  had 
a  variety  of  means  enabling  them  to  consume  and  contribute  to 
the  Treasury,  in  their  carrying  trade  abroad,  in  their  freights 
in  the  ordinary  trade,  including  the  coasting  trade  of  the  coun- 
try; in  the  great  mercantile  profits  from  the  Northern  capital 
employed  in  the  general  trade  which  exchanges  the  vast  amount 
of  exports  for  the  vast  amount  of  imports;  to  all  which  may  be 
added  the  larger  share  of  the  interest  and  instalments  hereto- 
fore paid  on  the  public  debt,  and  of  the  final  discharge  of  it  now 
taking  place. 

If  it  be  not  wonderful  that  such  a  one-sided  and  overcharged 
exhibition  should  have  produced  an  indignation  against  the 
tariff,  and  that  willing  ears  should  have  been  lent  to  comments 
on  the  Constitution,  rescuing  it  from  the  reproach  of  a  meaning 
which  could  be  so  abused,  will  it  be  wonderful  if,  when  the  par- 
oxysm of  the  fever  shall  be  over,  the  public  mind  shall  be  open 


1832.  LETTERS.  261 

to  tlic  proofs  that  it  had  been  misled  from  the  real  causes  of  the 
suffering  complained  of,  and  return  to  the  impressions  and  opin- 
ions which  prevailed  through  a  long  period  prior  to  the  delu- 
sion? 

What  then,  if  not  the  tariff,  is  to  account  for  the  great  de- 
pression complained  of  in  the  Southern  States  within  a  late  pe- 
riod? And  here  the  explanation  is  so  evident  and  so  abundantly 
sufficient,  that  it  must  be  satisfactory  to  every  mind  that  will 
but  suspend  its  prejudices. 

The  depression  felt  is  mainly  and  palpably  the  result  of  the 
great  fall  in  the  value  of  land  and  in  the  price  of  its  produce; 
and  this  double  fall  is  as  palpably  the  result,  in  the  former  case. 
of  the  quantity  of  cheap  and  fertile  land  at  market  in  the  West, 
and  in  the  latter  case,  of  the  increase  of  the  produce  of  the  land 
beyond  any  corresponding  increase  in  the  demand  for  it. 

How  could  it  otherwise  happen  than  that  a  superabundant 
offer  of  more  fertile  land  at  125  cents  per  acre  in  one  quarter 
should  depress  the  value  of  the  less  fertile  land  in  another  quar- 
ter? How  could  it  happen  otherwise  than  that  thousands  would 
sell  their  less  productive  lands,  which,  though  greatly  reduced 
in  price,  still  might  be  exchanged  one  acre  for  five  or  six  of  the 
fertile  land  in  the  West,  and  transfer  their  labour  to  a  region 
easily  accessible,  and  whence  its  trebled  fruits  would  be  almost 
as  cheaply  transported  to  the  common  market  as  from  the  region 
abandoned?  How,  again,  could  it  but  happen  that  this  rapidly 
augmenting  product  of  the  soil,  augmented  at  the  same  time  by 
an  increase  of  the  population  in  the  old  region,  notwithstanding 
the  emigrations  to  the  new;  how,  let  it  be  repeated,  could  it  fail 
to  happen  that  these  causes  should  have  the  impoverishing  effects 
in  the  old  which  have  been  experienced  from  them? 

The  soil  and  the  products  of  the  soil  constitute  more  especially 
the  wealth  of  the  Southern  States;  and  whatever  reduces  the 
value  of  both,  must  reduce  the  capital  of  the  proprietors,  and 
the  means  of  their  enjoyment.  Were  the  tariff,  whatever  be  the 
degree  in  which  it  has  added  to  the  other  causes  of  depression, 
to  be  removed  so  far  as  it  has  protective  operation,  the  other 
causes  remaining  the  same,  the  relief  would  be  but  little  felt. 


202  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

Had  the  other  great  causes  never  existed,  an  idea  at  which  an 
enlarged  patriotism  revolts,  or  were  they  now  to  cease,  which 
a  miracle  only  could  effect,  and  that  at  the  expense  of  every 
philanthropic  feeling,  such  would  have  been,  and  would  now  be, 
the  augmented  value  of  land  and  of  the  labour  employed  on  it 
in  the  Atlantic  States,  that  the  operation  of  the  tariff,  in  its 
double  character  of  revenue  and  protection,  would  be  merged  in 
the  general  prosperity. 

It  cannot  be  impertinent  here  to  remark,  though  comparisons 
are  not  always  allowable,  that  Virginia,  though  not  the  loudest 
complainant  of  the  actual  state  of  things,  has  been,  and  is,  the 
greatest  sufferer  from  it.  Her  lands  have  sunk  most  in  their 
value,  and  the  price  of  her  exports  most  in  foreign  markets. 
The  prices  of  her  great  staples,  flour  and  tobacco,  are,  and  have 
been  for  a  considerable  time,  at  a  lower  ebb  than  the  more 
Southern  staples  cotton  and  rice,  and  her  agricultural  prospects 
are  more  gloomy  than  those  of  her  Southern  sisters,  from  the 
Western  attraction  of  population  and  the  rivalship  of  Western 
exports.     It  is  a  fact  but  little  known,  that  more  tobacco  was 

exported  from  New  Orleans  in  the  year  ending  September , 

than  was  exported  that  year  from  Virginia  to  foreign  markets. 
And  it  is  manifest,  from  the  fitness  for  grain  of  all  sorts  in  the 
climate  and  soil  north  and  northwest  of  the  Ohio,  and  the  in- 
creasing facilities  of  their  conveyance  to  market,  that  wheat  and 
flour  will  more  and  more  feel  a  like  depression  with  that  of  to- 
bacco. The  effect  of  the  southwestern  culture  of  cotton  on 
that  staple,  though  doubtless  great  and  increasing,  is  as  yet  less 
than  the  staples  of  Virginia  have  felt,  and  are  likely  to  feel,  from 
the  Western  causes  alluded  to.  Is  it  an  unreasonable  calcula- 
tion, that  reflections  suggested  by  these  truths  will  lead  to  a 
less  biased  estimate  of  the  tariff,  and  of  the  questions  connected 
with  it? 

The  more  the  question  of  the  tariff  is  brought  to  the  test  of 
facts,  the  more  it  will  be  found  that  the  public  discontents  have 
proceeded  more  from  the  inequality  than  from  the  weight  of  its 
pressure,  and  more  from  the  exaggerations  of  both  than  from 
the  reality,  whatever  it  may  have  been,  of  either. 


1832.  LETTERS.  26C 

The  discontent  of  not  a  few  lias  been  heightened  by  the 
greater  productiveness  of  capital  in  the  Northern  States  than 
in  Virginia,  which  is  ascribed  to  a  legislative  policy  partial  to 
the  former,  and  particularly  to  the  manufacturing  capital.  That 
Northern  capital,  in  its  several  investments,  yields  a  greater 
income  than  a  Virginia  estate,  consisting  of  lands  and  servile 
labourers,  is  true.  But  it  may  be  readily  explained,  without 
calling  in  the  aid  of  the  tariff.  The  lands  and  slaves  of  Vir- 
ginia proprietors  never  yielded  a  revenue  equal  to  their  money 
value.  Their  value  to  the  resident  proprietor  has  resulted  in 
part  from  the  articles  furnished  for  his  household  establishment, 
partly  from  the  proceeds  of  his  crops,  while  he  enjoyed  what 
made  up  for  the  inferiority  of  his  income  in  the  silent  growth 
of  the  capital  itself,  first  in  the  rising  value  of  his  land,  which 
the  progress  of  the  country  doubled  nearly  as  soon  as  money 
was  doubled  by  its  interest;  secondly,  in  the  natural  increase 
of  his  slaves,  which  had  an  equivalent  effect.  At  present,  his 
land  has  fallen,  greatly  fallen,  instead  of  rising  in  its  market 
value,  and  his  slaves,  though  increasing  as  fast  as  ever  in  num- 
bers, are  decreasing  in  value,  with  the  temporary  exception  of 
purchases  made  by  the  Western  and  Southwestern  planters  in 
the  slaveholdiug  States.  Hence  the  condition  of  the  Virginia 
planters  is  worse  than  that  of  the  merchant,  the  shipowners,  and 
the  manufacturers,  and  the  money-lenders,  whose  capital  does 
not  decrease,  while  its  annual  profits  are  greater  than  those  of 
the  Virginia  capitals,  which,  with  less  of  annual  profits,  are  at 
the  same  time  decreasing  in  value.  This  difference,  being  as- 
cribed to  the  tariff,  has  added  fuel  to  the  flame  created  by  it. 
It  cannot  be  unreasonable  to  expect  that  a  cooler  momeut  will 
listen  to  the  error,  and  contribute  to  assuage  the  feelings  and 
moderate  the  opinions  which  it  has  fostered.  It  is  fair  to  notice 
another  error  which  has  found  its  way  into  the  popular  mind, 
namely,  that  the  capitals  of  the  manufacturers  are  the  offspring 
of  the  tariff.  In  many  instances  it  has  doubtless  swelled  the 
amount.  But  they  had  their  origin  previous  to  the  tariff  in  its 
obnoxious  form,  in  the  enterprise  of  commerce  during  the  wars 
of  Europe,  and  in  the  rich  captures  and  successful  adventures 


264  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 

during  our  late  war.  A  farther  plea  of  the  manufacturers  is, 
that  the  present  investment  of  their  capitals  was  made  under 
the  patronage  and  implied  pledge  of  the  law,  and  that  their  ruin 
would  necessarily  follow  a  repeal  of  the  law.  Considering  the 
circumstances  under  which  some  of  the  tariff  laws  were  passed, 
the  plea  cannot  he  sustained.  To  a  certain  extent  it  ought  to 
avail.  There  is  room,  therefore,  for  equitable  compromises  and 
salutary  reflections,  which  will  tend  to  alleviate  sectional  dis- 
cords, and  rectify  the  errors  which  have  been  the  parents  and 
nurses  of  them. 

May  we  not  look  forward  to  a  more  radical  cure  of  the  evil 
of  discontent  in  an  approaching  diminution  of  the  difference  of 
the  employment  of  capital  and  labour  in  the  great  sections  of  our 
country  ?  The  difference  at  present  lies  in  the  almost  exclusive 
employment  of  labour  in  the  Southern  section  in  agriculture, 
and  the  extensive  employment  of  it  in  manufactures  in  the 
Northern.  In  proportion  as  the  Southern  section  becomes  manu- 
facturing, the  dissimilarity  will  be  removed,  and  with  it  the 
conflicting  views  engendered  by  it.  And  is  not  a  substitution 
of  manufacturing  for  agricultural  labour  in  the  slaveholding 
section,  in  Virginia  particularly,  manifestly  approaching? 

Without  descending  to  minor  appropriations  of  labour,  the 
great  mass  of  it  in  our  country  may  be  divided  into  three  por- 
tions :  the  first  employed  in  procuring  from  the  earth  the  food 
and  other  articles  required  for  domestic  use;  the  second,  which 
derives  from  the  earth  the  supplies  called  for  by  foreign  markets; 
the  third,  the  portion  which,  not  being  needed  by  either,  will 
be  applicable  to  such  mechanical  and  manufacturing  employ- 
ments as  will  supply  at  home  what  a  failure  of  demand  for  our 
agricultural  products  will  disable  us  from  purchasing  abroad. 

It  is  evident  that  this  surplus  of  labour  beyond  the  first  and 
second  demand  for  it  is  already  felt,  and  that  the  attractions  of 
the  cheap  and  fertile  lands  in  the  West  and  Southwest  will  more 
and  more  augment  the  aggregate  products  of  the  soil  beyond 
any  probable  accumulations  in  the  demand  for  them.  It  enters 
into  this  interesting  calculation,  that,  notwithstanding  the  in- 
creasing population  in  Europe,  and  in  the  British  dominions 


1832.  LETTERS.  265 

more  especially,  the  improvements  in  agriculture  have  kept  pace 
with  the  consumption  of  food;  so  that  there  is  little  prospect  of 
any  steady  and  extensive  demand  of  that  staple  from  our  stores. 
It  is  moreover  found,  that  even  occasional  demands  can  be  sup- 
plied from  sources  less  distant  or  more  favoured  than  ours. 

Assuming,  then,  what  will  not  be  denied,  that  the  foreign 
market  is  already  glutted,  and  the  home  market  always  saturated 
with  agricultural  products,  more  especially  those  from  the  labour 
of  slaves,  it  follows,  from  the  rapid  increase  of  that  population, 
that  an  increasing  surplus  of  the  labour  beyond  the  demands  for 
agriculture  must  be  employed  on  the  other  branches  of  indus- 
try, and,  consequently,  in  diminution  of  the  distinction  between 
the  agricultural  and  manufacturing  States.  Labour  will  not 
continue  to  be  employed  on  the  earth,  notwithstanding  its  co- 
operating powers,  more  than  it  will  in  any  other  way,  where  its 
fruits  would  perish  on  hand. 

In  thickly-settled  countries  the  application  of  labour  to  the 
arts,  <fec,  is  understood  to  result  from  the  surplus  beyond  what 
is  required  for  a  full  cultivation  of  a  limited  soil.  In  the  Uni- 
ted States,  notwithstanding  the  sparseness  of  the  population 
compared  with  the  extent  of  the  vacant  soil,  there  is  found  to 
be  a  growing  surplus  of  labourers  beyond  a  prqfitahle  culture 
of  it;  a  peculiarity  which  baffles  the  reasonings  of  foreigners 
concerning  our  country,  and  is  not  sufficiently  adverted  to  by 
our  own  theoretic  politicians.  Our  country  must  be  a  manufac- 
turing as  well  as  an  agricultural  one,  without  waiting  for  a 
crowded  population,  unless  some  revolution  in  the  world  or  the 
discovery  of  new  products  of  the  earth,  demanded  at  home  or 
abroad,  should  unexpectedly  interpose. 

Will  it  be  too  much  to  hope,  that,  on  a  failure  of  manufactur- 
ing establishments  in  the  South,  likening  its  condition  to  that 
of  the  North,  the  success  of  them  in  the  North,  without  a  public 
patronage  offensive  to  the  South,  may  have  the  effect,  advanta- 
geous to  both,  of  substituting  for  a  foreign  commerce  inter- 
changes of  the  articles  respectively  furnished  by  them,  which 
will  add  that  cement  of  mutual  interest  to  the  many  others 
which  bind  them  together,  and  ought  forever  to  do  so  ?     The 


266  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

commerce  now  between  the  South  and  the  North  in  articles  of 
the  latter  not  protected  by  the  tariff,  is  considerable  and  pro- 
gressive in  its  amount,  and  is  found  to  be  valuable  on  both  sides. 

In  ten  years millions  will  be  added  to  our  population, 

of  which  can  be  spared  for  manufactures.   Not  less  than 

by  emigrants,  many  of  them  professed  manufacturers. 

Should  the  culture  of  tobacco  be  discontinued,  a  proportion  of 
the  40  or  50,000  hands  will  be  another  fund  of  manufacturing 
recruits. 

The  interior  commerce  of  a  country  is  known  to  be  more  im- 
portant than  its  exterior.  It  has  the  great  advantage  of  being 
independent  of  wars  and  of  other  foreign  contingencies;  and,  as 
far  as  commerce  among  nations  has  the  general  advantage  of 
multiplying  physical  enjoyments  and  extending  intellectual  ac- 
quirements and  improvements,  a  sufficient  scope  for  it  will  al- 
ways remain,  and  with  a  due  share  to  the  United  States,  in  the 
variety  of  soil,  of  climate,  of  pursuits,  of  habits,  and  even  of 
fashions  and  tastes,  which  distinguish  one  country  from  another, 
and  the  United  States  from  most  others. 

You  will  not  fail  to  observe,  that  in  the  preceding  pages  I 
have  not  done  more  than  contend  for  the  power  of  Comrrcss  to 
impose  duties  and  restrictions  on  imports  for  the  encouragement 
of  domestic  products;  and  for  the  fact  that  the  pressure  of  the 
tariff,  in  whatever  aspect  of  it,  is  not  the  principal-cause  of  the 
suffering  in  the  South,  but  that  this  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  other 
causes  which  will  account  for  it. 


TO   THOMAS   S.   GRIMKE. 

Jantary  10th,  1833. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  the  copy  of  your  "  letter  to  the  peo- 
ple of  S.  Carolina,"  after  the  delay  of  passing  to  Charlotte 
county,  thence  to  Charlottesville,  and  finally  to  Orange  Court 
House,  the  post-office  nearest  to  me.  I  beg  you  to  accept  my 
thanks  for  the  publication,  which  are  the  more  due  as  they  were 
not  preceded  by  what  were  so  for  the  several  other  favors  from 


1833.  LETTERS.  207 

your  pen.  Such  has  been  the  degree  of  my  ill  health,  for  a  long 
time,  as  to  occasion  many  regretted  omissions. 

The  letter  makes  a  powerful  and  persuasive  appeal  to  the 
understandings,  the  interests,  and  the  feelings  of  your  erring 
fellow-citizens;  and  it  would  seem  impossible  that  such  an  ap- 
peal should  be  altogether  unavailing,  accompanied  as  it  is  by 
the  universal  protest  against  the  novel  doctrines  and  rash  coun- 
sels of  the  ascendent  party;  a  protest  varying  in  language  from 
friendly  expostulation  to  the  strongest  tone  of  denunciation. 

The  Legislature  of  Virginia  has  now  the  whole  subject  under 
animated  discussion.  What  is  to  be  the  precise  result  of  the 
discordant  opinions  called  forth  I  cannot  conjecture.  Before 
tin's  reaches  you,  better  means  of  judging  than  I  possess  will 
probably  be  furnished  through  the  press  directly  from  Rich- 
mond. 


to   N.  P.   TPJST. 

Jan*  18,  1833. 

D«  Sir,— Yours  of  the  11th  was  duly  received.  I  am  sorry 
that  you  could  not  visit  us  at  the  intended  time;  and  still  more 
so,  for  the  obstacles  to  it.  We  shall  look  for  you  at  the  period 
you  now  have  in  view,  with  a  hope  that  the  trip  on  horseback 
will  be  as  favorable  to  your  health  as  it  promises  to  be.  I  have 
not  yet  looked  into  the  volumes  of  the  Gazette  kindly  enclosed 
to  me  on  the  Bank  transaction.  I  have,  indeed,  not  gone  much 
into  the  details  of  any  of  the  prominent  subjects  under  discus- 
sion at  Washington,  trusting  to  the  result  as  decided  by  the 
public  opinion.  It  gives  me  pleasure  to  learn  that  a  reaction  is 
taking  place  in  South  Carolina.  Common  sense,  common  good, 
and  the  universal  protest  out  of  the  State  against  nullification, 
cannot  fail  to  break  down  the  party  which  supports  it.  The 
coming  generation  will  look  back  with  astonishment  at  the  in- 
fatuation which  could  produce  the  present  state  of  things. 

You  see  what  is  going  on  at  Richmond  as  quickly  as  I  do. 
Among  the  diversified  projects  of  the  mediators,  it  is  not  cer- 


268  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

tain  which  will  prevail,  and  very  possible  that  they  may  all 
sink  together.  It  would  seem  that  the  doctrine  of  secession  is 
losing  ground;  hut  it  lias,  as  yet,  more  adherents  than  its  twin 
heresy  nullification,  though  it  ought  to  he  buried  in  the  same 
grave  with  it.  Many  seem  to  have  lost  sight  of  the  great  prin- 
ciple that  compact  is  the  basis  and  essence  of  free  government, 
and  that  no  right  to  disregard  it  belongs  to  a  party  till  released 
by  causes  of  which  the  oilier  parties  have  an  equal  right  to 
judge.  In  the  event  of  an  irreconcilable  conflict,  not  of  rights, 
but  of  opinions  and  claims  of  rights,  force  becomes  the  arbiter. 


TO   EDWARD    LIVINGSTON. 

Jan*  24.  1833. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  19th  instant,  in 
which  you  ask  assent  to  the  publication  of  my*  answer  to  yours 
of  April  29, 1830,  inclosing  a  copy  of  your  speech  on  Mr.  Foot's 
resolution.  As  the  answer  contained  nothing  of  a  confidential 
import,  there  can  be  no  objection  to  that  use  of  it,  other  tlian 
that  the  formal  sanction  of  the  writer  might  seem  to  attach  more 
importance  to  the  epitome  of  an  argument  previously  published 
at  some  length  than  it  could  merit.  It  may  be  well,  therefore, 
if  passed  to  the  press,  to  let  it  have  as  little  of  that  appearance 
as  possible. 

The  promised  bust  will  be  received  by  Mrs.  Madison  with 
pleasure;  the  greater,  as  she  knows  I  shall  share  it  with  her. 
It  will  be  associated,  in  the  little  group  we  possess,  with  the 
class  which  adds  to  other  titles  to  commemorative  distinction, 
appeals  to  the  feelings  of  private  friendship. 

I  thank  you,  sir,  for  the  kind  interest  you  take  in  my  health. 
Since  the  deficient  visit  paid  us,  which  we  hope  may  be  repeated 

*  On  recurring  to  the  answer  as  it  was  copied  for  my  files,  I  observe  a  little 
erratum,  which  vitiates  the  structure  of  a  sentence,  and  which  may  be  in  the 
letter  sent  you.  The  word  "  is"  should  be  erased,  making  it  read,  "  The  doc- 
trine, [nullifying,]  as  new  to  me  as  it  was  to  you,  derives  no  support,"'  Ac.  [See 
ante,  p.  80.] 


1833.  LETTERS.  2G9 

in  an  amended  form,  my  health  has  somewhat  improved,  but  tho 
wishes  of  my  friends  have  too  much  influenced  their  estimate  of 
it.  A  singular  change  is  in  an  occasional  relaxation  of  the  ter- 
minating joints  of  my  rheumatic  fingers,  which  gives  a  degree 
of  easy  play  to  the  pen  in  the  microscopic  characters  of  which 
I  am  giving  a  sample. 


TO    ANDREW   STEVENSON. 

February  4,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  communication  of  the  29th 
ultimo,  and  have  read  it  with  much  pleasure.  It  presents  the 
doctrines  of  nullification  and  secession  in  lights  that  must  con- 
found, if  failing  to  convince,  their  patrons. 

You  have  done  well  in  rescuing  the  proceedings  of  Virginia 
in  1798-99  from  the  many  misconstructions  and  misapplications 
of  them.  The  seventh  resolution  ought  to  have  explained  the 
third,  and  the  report  both.  Many,  however,  have  strangely 
overlooked  the  distinction,  obvious  in  itself,  and  indicated  by 
the  course  of  the  reasoning  between  the  right  of  the  States 
(plural  always  used)  as  parties  to  the  Constitution,  and  the 
right  of  a  single  party.  Few,  also,  seem  to  have  looked  back 
to  the  question  raised  by  the  alien  and  sedition  laws,  as  one  es- 
sentially between  the  government  and  the  constituent  body;  or 
to  the  other  question  raised,  how  far  a  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  was  a  bar  to  the  interposition  of 
the  States;  it  having  been  alleged  to  be  so,  even  to  declarations 
of  legislative  opinions.  These  questions  account  for  the  scope 
of  the  reasoning  in  material  parts  of  those  documents. 

Secession  presents  a  question  more  particularly  between  the 
States  themselves,  as  parties  to  the  constitutional  compact;  and 
the  great  argument  for  it  is  derived  from  the  sovereignty  of  the 
parties;  as  if  the  more  complete  the  authority  to  enter  into  a 
compact,  the  less  was  the  obligation  to  abide  by  it.  It  is  but 
fair  to  observe,  that  those  who  assert  the  right  present  it  in 
forms  essentially  different;  some  as  a  right  always  existing, 


270  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

and  to  1)0  used  at  pleasure;  others  as  a  right  created  by  ex- 
treme cases  requiring  it.  The  latter  class  are  wrong  only  in 
using  terms  which  confound  them  with  the  former. 

Of  late,  attempts  are  observed  to  shelter  the  heresy  of  seces- 
sion under  the  case  of  expatriation,  from  which  it  essentially 
differs.  The  expatriating  party  removes  only  his  person  and 
his  movable  property,  and  does  not  incommode  those  whom  he 
leaves.  A  seceding  State  mutilates  the  domain,  and  disturbs 
the  whole  system  from  which  it  separates  itself.  Pushed  to  the 
extent  in  which  the  right  is  sometimes  asserted,  it  might  break 
into  fragments  every  single  community. 

It  is  curious  to  see  how  the  nullifying  and  seceding  champions 
draw  arguments  from  the  difficulty,  under  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  of  avoiding  collisions,  and  from  the  want  of 
remedies  for  possible  occurrences.  This  is  the  case  more  or 
less  of  all  free  governments,  and  of  every  State  in  the  Union. 
The  government  of  a  State  would  be  as  readily  destroyed  by  a 
refusal  or  neglect  of  the  people  to  exercise  their  franchise,  as 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  by  a  like  conduct  in  the 
States  towards  it.  If  the  two  Houses  of  Congress  or  of  a  State 
Legislature  were  absolutely  inflexible  in  a  revenue  bill,  the  ef- 
fect would  be  the  same  in  both  governments.  The  judiciary  of 
a  State  is  the  last  resort  within  the  purview  of  a  State  constitu- 
tion, and  a  gross  usurpation  or  abuse  of  its  powers  would  pro- 
duce a  state  of  things  like  that  resulting  from  such  an  occur- 
rence within  the  federal  sphere. 

Just  as  I  received  your  favour,  I  was  furnishing  a  sketch  of 
ideas  in  compliance  with  a  wish  which  had  been  conveyed  to 
me.  I  enclose  a  copy  of  it.*  In  the  present  diversity  of  opin- 
ions and  effervescences  of  the  passions,  it  is  not  probable  that 
anything  will  be  done  by  the  public  authorities  which  will  ac- 
cord with  the  cooler  judgment  of  a  future  day,  to  which  I  have 
endeavoured  to  conform  mine.  Be  so  good  as  to  let  Mr.  Patton 
have  a  sight  of  the  paper,  and  Mr.  Rives  also,  if  you  choose. 


*  The  enclosure  incorporated  in  another  paper  on  nullification.    [See  post, 
3%.— £rf.] 


1833.  LETTERS.  2H 

They  arc  the  two  of  your  political  comrades  with  wliom  I  hap- 
pen to  have  most  communication  on  political  subjects.  I  am 
well  aware  that  their  sentiments  may  be  very  different  from 
some  of  mine,  as  some  of  yours  may  also  be.  As  the  sketch 
was  hastily  made,  and  I  am  sensible  may  be  made  more  free 
from  criticism  in  its  phraseology,  and  as  it  is  possible  I  may 
expand  it  in  some  of  its  positions,  I  must  request  the  favour  of 
you  to  return  it,  at  your  leisure,  without  any  copy  having  been 
taken. 

If  legislative  resolutions  declaring  the  essential  characteris- 
tics of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  be  deemed  expe- 
dient, they  ought  to  be  conformed  as  much  as  possible  to  ac- 
knowledged principles,  to  known  facts,  and  to  the  text  of  the 
Constitution. 

In  the  present  state  of  things  in  our  country,  if  I  am  to  an- 
swer the  wish  conveyed  to  me,  I  must  say  that  the  members  of 
Congress  from  Virginia  would  do  well  to  urge  a  reduction  and 
modification  of  the  tariff  laws;  but,  in  the  first  place,  with  a 
reasonable  attention  as  well  to  the  great  interests  at  stake,  and 
the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  created,  in  one  sec- 
tion, as  to  the  justice  and  the  interests  appealed  to  in  behalf  of 
another  section.  It  is  quite  possible  that  a  sudden  withdrawal 
from  the  market  of  domestic  supplies,  extended  as  they  now  are, 
might,  while  ruinous  to  the  manufacturers,  be  injurious  also  to 
the  consumers;  since  some  time  would  elapse  before  the  vacuum 
could  be  filled  from  other  sources,  the  prices  in  the  mean  time 
rising,  of  course,  from  a  diminution  of  the  supply  and  a  contin- 
uance of  the  demand. 

Secondly,  without  incurring  the  appearance  of  yielding  to 
threatened  consequences  of  not  doing  what  is  required  by  the 
discontented  anywhere. 

Thirdly,  without  opposing  any  constitutional  provisions  that 
may  be  necessary  and  proper  to  defeat  a  resistence  to  the  exe- 
cution of  the  laws;  and  particularly  any  constitutional  provision 
that  may  insure  the  execution  of  the  laws,  in  a  mode  that  will 
avoid  a  resort  to,  or  the  risk  of,  a  conflict  at  arms. 

Fourthly,  without  any  course  whatever  that  would  pledge  or 


072  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

commit  Virginia  to  take  side  with  South  Carolina,  or  any  other 
State,  in  resisting  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  unless  causes 
should  arise,  of  which  Virginia  should  be  free  to  judge,  justify- 
ing and  requiring  her  so  to  do;  and  particularly  without  any 
commitment  of  her  to  view  in  that  light  laws  of  the  United 
States  now  existing. 

Mrs.  M.  joins  in  affectionate  salutations. 


TO   ANDREW   STEVENSON. 

Montpellier,  February  10,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  favour  of  the  8th  instant,  with  the  paper 
returned,  was  safely  received.  It  may  not  be  amiss  for  me  to 
say,  that  the  opinion  expressed  in  the  letter,  that  constitutional 
provisions,  necessary  and  proper  to  defeat  insistence  to  the 
laws,  ought  not  to  be  opposed,  had  no  specific  reference  to  the 
bill  depending,  but  was  a  general  remark,  that  whatever  consti- 
tutional provisions  might  be  necessary  and  proper  for  that  pur- 
pose ought  not  to  be  opposed.  I  consider  a  successful  resist- 
ance to  the  laws,  as  now  attempted,  if  not  immediately  mortal 
to  the  Union,  as  at  least  a  mortal  wound  to  it. 

I  hope  it  is  well  understood  that  my  object  in  giving  our  two 
friends  a  sight  of  the  paper  was  merely  a  compliance  with  a 
wish  indirectly  conveyed  by  one*  and  a  mark  of  respect  for  the 
other;t  and  to  intimate  my  views  of  the  subject  without  any 
bearing  on  theirs.  I  am  well  aware,  that,  in  choosing  between 
alternatives,  they  may  have  lights  I  do  not  possess;  and,  more- 
over, that  those  in  public  trust  may  justly  feel  an  obligation  to 
respect  the  opinions  of  their  constituents  which  is  not  imposed 
on  a  private  citizen. 

I  am  sorry  to  learn  that  the  prospect  of  a  conciliatory  re- 
sult to  the  deliberations  of  Congress  is  so  little  encouraging. 
I  wish  it  may  not  be  found  that  Virginia  will  be  caught  in 

*  Mr.  Patton.     [See  ante,  p.  270.]  f  Mr-  Rives-     fSee  anU'  P1  270d 


1833.  LETTERS.  273 

the  trap  with  an  anti-tariff  bait  in  it.  If  South  Carolina  re- 
cedes, it  will  be  on  the  avowed  grounds  of  her  respect  for  the 
interposition  of  Virginia,  and  a  reliance  that  Virginia  is  to 
make  a  common  cause  with  her  throughout.  In  that  event,  and 
a  continuance  of  the  tariff  laws,  the  prospect  before  us  would 
be  a  rupture  of  the  Union;  a  Southern  confederacy;  mutual 
enmity  with  the  Northern;  the  most  dreadful  animosities  and 
border  wars,  springing  from  the  case  of  slaves;  rival  alliances 
abroad;  standing  armies  at  home,  to  be  supported  by  internal 
taxes;  and  federal  Governments,  with  powers  of  a  more  con- 
solidating and  monarchical  tendency  than  the  greatest  jealousy 
has  charged  on  the  existing  system. 

I  have  just  read  Mr.  Marshairs*speech  in  the  House  of  Dele- 
gales  on  Federal  Relations.  It  is  a  very  able  one,  and  a  strong 
backer  of  your  letter  on  the  subject  of  secession.  The  perora- 
tion is  as  beautiful  as  its  warning  to  Virginia  is  solemn  and 
impressive. 


TO   THE   REVD   It.    It.    GURLEY. 

DR  Sir, — Since  I  received  your  letter  of  the  31  ult.,  request- 
ing, in  behalf  of  the  Revd  Mr.  Brooks,  now  in  Europe,  a  letter 
of  introduction  to  the  friends  of  American  Colonization  in  Eng- 
land and  France,  I  have  been  more  than  usually  indisposed;  and 
for  some  days  I  have  been  suffering  under  a  new  malady,  which 
makes  the  use  of  the  pen  very  painful.  With  this  apology  may 
I  ask  the  favor  of  you  to  comply  with  the  object  of  Mr.  Brooks 
by  a  letter  from  yourself?  Your  better  knowledge  of  all  the 
circumstances  of  such  a  case  will  enable  you  the  better  to  adapt 
to  it  the  proper  shape  and  scope  of  the  introduction  asked  for. 
The  benevolent  views  of  Mr.  Brooks  preclude,  of  course,  the 
idea  of  expense  in  any  form  to  the  Society.  But  they  might,  on 
the  contrary,  promote  the  idea  of  pecuniary  aids  to  the  Society, 
which,  though  the  great  desideratum  with  it,  I  have  always 
wished  to  be  obtained  at  home  without  a  resort  to  foreign  con- 

*  Speech,  delivered   7th  January,  1833.     Published  in   Richmond  Enquirer, 
February  7th. 

VOL.    IV.  18 


274  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  183'3. 

tribution.  A  vital  object  of  the  Institution  being  to  free  our 
country  of  a  great  internal  evil,  justice  requires  this;  and  our 
pride,  while  wo  are  describing  the  prosperity  of  our  country  as 
greater  than  that  of  any  other,  would  seem  to  be  a  motive 
against  taxing  any  other  for  an  interest  so  far  as  it  may  not  be 
a  common  one.  In  this  light  I  have  always  viewed  solicitations 
of  money  from  abroad  for  schools,  &c,  <fcc.  You  will,  however, 
take  for  what  they  arc  worth  merely  remarks  which  may  de- 
serve more  consideration  than,  in  my  present  condition,  I  can 
give  them;  assuring  yourself  always  of  my  great  and  cordial 
esteem. 


TO   THE   REVD    R.    R.    GURLEY. 

Montpelliee,  Feb?  19,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  12th,  inform- 
ing me  that  I  have  been  unanimously  elected  to  the  office  of 
President  by  the  "  American  Colonization  Society." 

The  great  and  growing  importance  of  the  Society  and  the 
signal  philanthropy  of  its  members  give  to  the  distinction  con- 
ferred on  me  a  value  of  which  I  am  deeply  sensible. 

It  is  incumbent  on  me,  at  the  same  time,  to  say,  that  my  very 
advanced  age  and  impaired  health  leave  me  no  hope  of  an  ade- 
quacy to  the  duties  of  the  station  which  I  should  be  proud  to 
perform.  It  will  not  the  less  be  my  earnest  prayer  that  every 
success  may  reward  the  labours  of  an  Institution  which,  though 
so  humble  in  its  origin,  is  so  noble  in  its  object  of  removing  a 
great  evil  from  its  own  country  by  means  which  may  communi- 
cate to  another  the  greatest  of  blessings. 


TO   THOMAS    R.    DEW. 

MoNTPELLiER.Feby  23,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received,  in  due  time,  your  letter  of  the  15th 
ult.,  with  copies  of  the  two  pamphlets;  one  on  the  "  Restrictive 
System,"  the  other  on  the  "Slave  Question." 


1833.  LETTERS.  275 

The  former  I  have  not  yet  been  able  to  look  into,  and  in  read- 
ing the  latter  with  the  proper  attention  I  have  been  much  re- 
tarded by  many  interruptions,  as  well  as  by  the  feebleness  inci- 
dent to  my  great  age,  increased  as  it  is  by  the  effects  of  an 
acute  fever,  preceded  and  followed  by  a  chronic  complaint 
under  which  I  am  still  labouring.  This  explanation  of  the  delay 
in  acknowledging  your  favor  will  be  an  apology,  also,  for  tli<- 
brevity  and  generality  of  the  answer.  For  the  freedom  of  it, 
none,  I  am  sure,  will  be  required.  In  the  views  of  the  subject 
taken  in  the  pamphlet,  I  have  found  much  valuable  and  inter- 
esting information,  with  ample  proof  of  the  numerous  obstacles 
to  a  removal  of  slavery  from  our  country,  and  everything  that 
could  be  offered  in  mitigation  of  its  continuance;  but  I  am 
obliged  to  say,  that  in  not  a  few  of  the  data  from  which  von 
reason,  and  in  the  conclusion  to  which  you  are  led,  I  cannot 
concur. 

I  am  aware  of  the  impracticability  of  an  immediate  or  early 
execution  of  any  plan  that  combines  deportation  with  emanci- 
pation, and  of  the  inadmissibility  of  emancipation  without  de- 
portation. But  I  have  yielded  to  the  expedienc}"  of  attempting 
a  gradual  remedy,  by  providing  for  the  double  operation. 

If  emancipation  was  the  sole  object,  the  extinguishment  of 
slavery  would  be  easy,  cheap,  and  complete.  The  purchase  by 
the  public  of  all  female  children,  at  their  birth,  leaving  them  in 
bondage  till  it  would  defray  the  charge  of  rearing  them,  would, 
within  a  limited  period,  be  a  radical  resort. 

With  the  condition  of  deportation,  it  has  appeared  to  me,  that 
the  great  difficulty  does  not  lie  either  in  the  expense  of  emanci- 
pation, or  in  the  expense  or  the  means  of  deportation,  but  in 
the  attainment — 1,  of  the  requisite  asylums;  2,  the  consent  of  the 
individuals  to  be  removed;  3,  the  labour  for  the  vacuum  to  be 
created. 

With  regard  to  the  expense — 1,  much  will  be  saved  by  volun- 
tary emancipations,  increasing  under  the  influence  of  example, 
and  the  prospect  of  bettering  the  lot  of  the  slaves;  2,  much  may 
be  expected  in  gifts  and  legacies  from  the  opulent,  the  philan- 
thropic, and  the  conscientious;  3,  more  still  from  legislative 


276  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

grants  1)}'  the  States,  of  winch  encouraging  examples  and  indi- 
cations have  already  appeared;  4,  nor  is  there  any  room  for 
despair  of  aid  from  the  indirect  or  direct  proceeds  of  the  public 
lands  hold  in  trust  by  Congress.  With  a  sufficiency  of  pecuniary 
means,  the  facility  of  providing  a  naval  transportation  of  the 
exiles  is  shewn  by  the  present  amount  of  our  tonnage  and  the 
promptitude  with  which  it  can  be  enlarged;  by  the  number  of 
emigrants  brought  from  Europe  to  N.  America  within  the  last 
year,  and  by  the  greater  number  of  slaves  which  have  been, 
within  single  years,  brought  from  the  coast  of  Africa  across  the 
Atlantic. 

In  the  attainment  of  adequate  asylums,  the  difficulty,  though 
it  may  be  considerable,  is  far  from  being  discouraging.  Africa 
is  justly  the  favorite  choice  of  the  patrons  of  colonization;  and 
the  prospect  there  is  flattering — 1,  in  the  territory  already  ac- 
quired; 2,  in  the  extent  of  coast  yet  to  be  explored,  and  which 
may  be  equally  convenient;  3,  the  adjacent  interior  into  which 
the  littoral  settlements  can  be  expanded  under  the  auspices  of 
physical  affinities  between  the  new  comers  and  the  natives,  and 
of  the  moral  superiorities  of  the  former;  4,  the  great  inland  re- 
gions now  ascertained  to  be  accessible  by  navigable  waters,  and 
opening  new  fields  for  colonizing  enterprises. 

But  Africa,  though  the  primary,  is  not  the  sole  asylum  within 
contemplation;  an  auxiliary  one  presents  itself  in  the  islands 
adjoining  this  continent,  where  the  coloured  population  is  al- 
ready dominant,  and  where  the  wheel  of  revolution  may  from 
time  to  time  produce  the  like  result. 

Nor  ought  another  contingent  receptacle  for  emancipated 
slaves  to  be  altogether  overlooked.  It  exists  within  the  terri- 
tory under  the  control  of  the  United  States,  and  is  not  too 
distant  to  be  out  of  reach,  whilst  sufficiently  distant  to  avoid,  for 
an  indefinite  period,  the  collisions  to  be  apprehended  from  the 
vicinity  of  people  distinguished  from  each  other  by  physical  as 
well  as  other  characteristics. 

The  consent  of  the  individuals  is  another  pre-requisite  in  the 
plan  of  removal.  At  present  there  is  a  known  repugnance  in  those 
already  in  a  state  of  freedom  to  leave  their  native  homes,  and 


1833.  LETTERS.  277 

among  the  slaves  there  is  an  almost  universal  preference  of  their 
present  condition  to  freedom  in  a  distant  and  unknown  land. 
But  in  both  classes,  particularly  that  of  the  slaves,  the  preju- 
dices arise  from  a  distrust  of  the  favorable  accounts  coming  to 
them  through  white  channels.  By  degrees  truth  will  find  its 
way  to  them  from  sources  in  which  they  will  confide,  and  their 
aversion  to  removal  may  be  overcome  as  fast  as  the  means  of 
effectuating  it  shall  accrue. 

The  difficulty  of  replacing  the  labour  withdrawn  by  a  removal 
of  the  slaves,  seems  to  be  urged  as  of  itself  an  insuperable  ob- 
jection to  the  attempt.  The  answer  to  it  is — 1,  that  notwith- 
standing the  emigrations  of  the  whites,  there  will  be  an  annual 
and  by  degrees  an  increasing  surplus  of  the  remaining  mass; 
2,  that  there  will  be  an  attraction  of  whites  from  without,  in- 
creasing with  the  demand,  and,  as  the  population  elsewhere  will 
be  yielding  a  surplus  to  be  attracted;  3,  that  as  the  culture  of 
tobacco  declines  with  the  contraction  of  the  space  within  which 
it  is  profitable,  and  still  more  from  the  successful  competition 
in  the  West,  and  as  the  farming  system  takes  place  of  the  plant- 
ing, a  portion  of  labour  can  be  spared  without  impairing  the 
requisite  stock;  4,  that  although  the  process  must  be  slow,  be 
attended  with  much  inconvenience,  and  be  not  even  certain  in 
its  result,  is  it  not  preferable  to  a  torpid  acquiescence  in  a  per- 
petuation of  slavery,  or  an  extinguishment  of  it  by  convulsions 
more  disastrous  in  their  character  and  consequences  than  sla- 
very itself? 

In  my  estimate  of  the  experiment  instituted  by  the  Coloniza- 
tion Society,  I  may  indulge  too  much  my  wishes  and  hopes,  to 
be  safe  from  error.  But  a  partial  success  will  have  its  value, 
and  an  entire  failure  will  leave  behind  a  consciousness  of  the 
laudable  intentions  with  which  relief  from  the  greatest  of  our 
calamities  was  attempted  in  the  only  mode  presenting  a  chance 
of  effecting  it. 

I  hope  I  shall  be  pardoned  for  remarking,  that  in  accounting 
for  the  depressed  condition  of  Virginia,  you  seem  to  allow  too 
little  to  the  existence  of  slavery,  ascribe  too  much  to  the  tariff 


?78  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

laws,  and  not  to  have  sufficiently  taken  into  view  the  effect  of 
the  rapid  settlement  of  the  Western  and  Southwestern  country. 

Previous  to  the  Revolution,  when,  of  these  causes,  slavery 
alone  was  in  operation,  the  face  of  Virginia  was,  in  every  feature 
of  improvement  and  prosperity,  a  contrast  to  the  Colonics  where 
slavery  did  not  exist,  or  in  a  degree  only,  not  worthy  of  notice. 
Again,  during  the  period  of  the  tariff  laws  prior  to  the  latter 
state  of  them,  the  pressure  was  little,  if  at  all,  regarded  as  a 
source  of  the  general  suffering.  And  whatever  may  be  the  de- 
gree in  which  the  extravagant  augmentation  of  the  Tariff  may 
have  contributed  to  the  depression,  the  extent  of  this  cannot 
be  explained  by  the  extent  of  the  cause.  The  great  and  ade- 
quate cause  of  the  evil  is  the  cause  last  mentioned,  if  that  be 
indeed  an  evil  which  improves  the  condition  of  our  migrating 
citizens,  and  adds  more  to  the  growth  and  prosperity  of  the 
whole  than  it  subtracts  from  a  part  of  the  community. 

Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  the  actual  and  prospective 
depression  of  Virginia  is  to  be  referred  to  the  fall  in  the  value 
of  her  landed  property,  and  in  that  of  the  staple  products  of  the 
land.  And  it  is  not  less  certain  that  the  fall  in  both  cases  is 
the  inevitable  effect  of  the  redundancy  in  the  market  both  of 
land  and  of  its  products.  The  vast  amount  of  fertile  land  of- 
fered at  125  cents  per  acre  in  the  West  and  S.  West  could  not 
fail  to  have  the  effect  already  experienced,  of  reducing  the  land 
here  to  half  its  value;  and  when  the  labour  that  will  here  pro- 
duce one  hogshead  of  tobacco  and  ten  barrels  of  flour  will  there 
produce  two  lihd8  and  twenty  barrels,  now  so  cheaply  trans- 
portable to  the  destined  outlets,  a  like  effect  on  these  articles 
must  necessarily  ensue.  Already  more  tobacco  is  sent  to  Xew 
Orleans  than  is  exported  from  Virginia  to  foreign  markets; 
whilst  the  article  of  flour,  exceeding  for  the  most  part  the  de- 
mand for  it,  is  in  a  course  of  rapid  increase  from  new  sources 
as  boundless  as  they  arc  productive.  The  great  staples  of  Vir- 
ginia have  but  a  limited  market,  which  is  easily  glutted.  They 
have  in  fact  sunk  more  in  price,  and  have  a  more  threatening 
prospect,  than  the  more  southern  staples  of  cotton  and  rice. 


11833.  LETTERS.  279 

The  case  is  believed  to  be  the  same  with  her  landed  property  . 
That  it  is  so  with  her  slaves  is  proved  by  the  purchases  made 
here  for  the  market  there. 

The  reflections  suggested  by  this  aspect  of  things  will  be  more 
appropriate  in  your  hands  than  in  mine.  They  are  also  beyond 
the  tether  of  my  subject,  which  I  fear  I  have  already  over- 
strained. I  hasten,  therefore,  to  conclude,  with  a  tender  of  the 
high  respect  and  cordial  regards  which  1  pray  you  to  accept. 


TO  JUDGE   BUCKNER   THRUSTON. 

March  1,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  13th  instant  was  duly  received 
with  a  copy  of  Judge  C ranch's  Memoir  of  President  Adams,  to 
which  is  annexed  your  Latin  epitaph,  embracing  the  coincidences 
in  the  lives  and  deaths  of  him  and  of  President  Jefferson. 

After  an  alienation  through  so  long  a  period  from  classical 
studies,  I  may  well  distrust  my  competency  to  decide  on  the 
Latinity  of  the  epitaph.  To  the  vein  of  just  thought  which  runs 
through  it,  and  the  apt  management  of  the  points  most  in  relief, 
it  is  not  difficult  to  do  justice.  And  the  Latinity  would  seem  to 
be  more  exempt  from  modernism  in  its  cast  than  is  common  with 
Latin  compositions  of  modern  date. 

A  striking  difference  between  the  Latin  and  English  idioms 
is  in  the  collocation  of  the  words;  the  inflections  and  termina- 
tions of  the  former  admitting  a  wide  separation,  by  interposed 
words,  of  those  belonging  to  each  other,  without  confusion  or 
ob:"~  '  ..j,  «*ua  with  an  enlarged  scope  for  variety  and  euphony 
in  the  structure  of  sentences.  A  literal  translation  of  Latin  into 
English,  word  for  word,  according  to  the  order  of  the  words, 
would  be  startling  to  an  English  eye,  as  a  like  version  of  Eng- 
lish into  Latin  would  be,  though,  perhaps,  in  a  less  degree  to 
the  eye  of  a  Roman.  Hence  the  difficulty  in  modern  Latin  of 
avoiding  a  distribution  of  the  words  not  conformable  to  that  of 
ancient  models. 

But  the  greatest  difficulty,  as  in  every  use  of  a  foreign  Ian- 


280  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

guage,  is  in  selecting  the  appropriate  word  or  phrase  among 
those  differing  in  the  shades  of  meaning,  and  where  the  meaning 
may  lie  essentially  varied  by  the  particular  applications  of  them. 
Hence  the  mistakes,  sometimes  ludicrous,  in  the  use  of  a  foreign 
language  imperfectly  understood;  as  in  the  case  of  the  French- 
man, who,  finding  in  the  dictionary  that  to  pickle  meant  to  pre- 
serve, took  leave  of  his  friends  with  a  G pickle  you. 

I  have  made  these  remarks  with  reference  to  my  own  defi- 
ciencies as  a  critic,  and  by  no  means  as  a  criticism  on  the 
epitaph. 

The  Memoir,  in  perusing  which  I  have  been  much  retarded, 
appears  to  be  well  written,  and  to  comprise  much  interesting 
information  doing  justice  to  the  distinguished  subject  of  it. 
With  respect  to  some  of  the  diplomatic  passages,  there  have 
been  intimations  that  important  lights,  not  yet  known  to  the 
public,  exist  in  foreign  archives. 

Mrs.  M.  and  myself  are  gratified  by  your  kind  remembrances 
and  those  of  Mrs.  T.  and  your  daughter,  and  offer  a  sincere  re- 
turn of  them. 


TO   JOHN   TYLER.* 

In  your  speech  of  February  6,  1833,  you  say :  "He  [Edmund 
Randolph]  proposed  [in  the  Federal  Convention  of  1787]  a  su- 
preme National  Government,  with  a  supreme  Executive,  a  su- 
preme Legislature,  and  a  supreme  Judiciary,  and  a  power  in 
Congress  to  veto  State  laws. 

"  Mr.  Madison,  I  believe,  sir,  was  also  an  advocate  of  this 
plan  of  Government.  If  I  run  into  error  on  this  point  I  can 
easily  be  put  right.  The  design  of  this  plan,  it  is  obvious,  was 
to  render  the  States  nothing  more  than  the  provinces  of  a  great 
Government,  to  rear  upon  the  ruins  of  the  old  Confederacy  a 
consolidated  Government,  one  and  indivisible." 

*  This  letter,  it  appears,  was  not  sent. 


1833.  LETTERS.  281 

I  readily  do  you  the  justice  to  believe  that  it  was  far  from 
your  intention  to  do  injustice  to  the  Virginia  Deputies  to  tho 
Convention  of  1787.  But  it  is  not  the  less  certain  that  it  has 
been  done  to  all  of  them,  and  particularly  to  Mr.  Edmund  Ran- 
dolph. 

The  resolutions  proposed  by  him  were  the  result  of  a  consul- 
tation among  the  Deputies,  the  whole  number,  seven,  being  pres- 
ent. The  part  which  Virginia  had  borne  in  bringing  about  the 
Convention  suggested  the  idea  that  some  such  initiative  step 
might  be  expected  from  their  deputation,  and  Mr.  Randolph 
was  designated  for  the  task.  It  was  perfectly  understood  that 
the  propositions  committed,  no  one  to  their  precise  tenor  or 
form,  and  that  the  members  of  the  deputation  would  be  as  free 
in  discussing  and  shaping  them  as  the  other  members  of  the 
Convention.  Mr.  Randolph  was  made  the  organ  on  the  occa- 
sion, being  then  the  Governor  of  the  State,  of  distinguished 
talents,  and  in  the  habit  of  public  speaking.  General  Washing- 
ton, though  at  the  head  of  the  list,  was,  for  obvious  reasons,  dis- 
inclined to  take  the  lead.  It  was  also  foreseen  that  he  would 
be  immediately  called  to  the  presiding  station. 

Now  what  was  the  plan  sketched  in  the  propositions? 

They  proposed  that  "  the  Articles  of  Confederation  should  be 
so  corrected  and  enlarged  as  to  accomplish  the  objects  of  their 
institution,  namely,  common  defence,  security  of  liberty,  and 
general  welfare;"  [the  words  of  the  Confederation.] 

"  That  a  national  Legislature,  a  national  Executive,  and  a 
national  Judiciary  should  be  established.  [This  organization  of 
departments  the  same  as  in  the  adopted  Constitution.] 

"  That  the  right  of  suffrage  in  the  Legislature  should  be  [not 
equal  among  the  States,  as  in  the  Confederation,  but]  propor- 
tioned to  quotas  of  contribution  or  numbers  of  free  inhabitants, 
as  might  seem  best  in  different  cases.  [The  same  correspond- 
ing in  principle  with  the  mixed  rule  adopted.] 

"  That  it  should  consist  of  two  branches;  the  first  elected  by 
the  people  of  the  several  States,  the  second  by  the  first,  of  a 
number  nominated  by  the  State  Legislatures.  [A  mode  of  form- 
ing a  Senate  regarded  as  more  just  to  the  large  States  than  the 


282  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

equality  which  was  yielded  to  the  small  States  by  the  compro- 
mise with  them,  but  not  material  in  any  other  view.  In  reference 
to  the  practicable  equilibrium  between  the  General  and  the 
State  authorities,  the  comparative  influence  of  the  two  modes 
will  depend  on  the  question  whether  the  small  States  will  in- 
cline most  to  the  former  or  to  the  latter  scale.] 

"  That  a  national  Executive,  with  a  council  of  revision  con- 
sisting- of  a  number  of  the  Judiciary,  [which  Mr.  Jefferson  would 
have  approved,]  and  a  qualified  negative  on  the  laws,  be  insti- 
tuted, to  be  chosen  by  the  Legislature  for  the  term  of  —  years, 
to  be  ineligible  a  second  time,  and  with  a  compensation  to  be 
neither  increased  nor  diminished  so  as  to  affect  the  existing 
magistracy.  [There  is  nothing  in  this  executive  modification 
materially  different  in  its  constitutional  bearing  from  that  finally 
adopted  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.] 

"  That  a  national  Judiciary  be  established,  consisting  of  a  su- 
preme appellate  and  inferior  tribunals,  to  hold  their  offices  du- 
ring good  behaviour,  and  with  compensations  not  to  be  increased 
or  diminished  so  as  to  affect  persons  in  office.  [There  can  be 
nothing  here  subjecting  it  to  unfavourable  comparison  with  the 
article  in  the  Constitution  existing.] 

"  That  provision  ought  to  be  made  for  the  admission  of  new 
States,  lawfully  arising  within  the  limits  of  the  United  States, 
with  the  consent  of  a  number  of  votes  in  the  National  Legisla- 
ture less  than  the  whole.  [This  is  not  at  variance  with  the  ex- 
isting provisions.] 

"  That  a  republican  government  ought  to  be  guarantied  by 
the  United  States  to  each  State.  [This  is  among  the  existing 
provisions.] 

"  That  provision  ought  to  be  made  for  amending  the  articles 
of  Union  without  requiring  the  assent  of  the  National  Legisla- 
ture.    [This  is  done  in  the  Constitution.] 

"That  the  legislative,  executive,  and  judiciary  powers  of  the 
several  States  ought  to  bo  bound  by  oath  to  support  the  articles 
of  Union.  [This  was  provided  with  the  emphatic  addition  of 
'anything  in  the  constitution  or  laws  of  the  States  notwith- 
standing.'] 


1833.  LETTERS.  283 

"That  the  act  of  the  Convention,  after  the  approbation  of  the 

(then)  Congress,  to  be  submitted  to  an  assembly  or  assemblies 
of  representatives  recommended  by  the  several  Legislatures  to 
be  expressly  chosen  by  the  people  to  consider  and  decide  there- 
on."    [This  was  the  course  pursued.] 

So  much  for  the  structure  of  the  Government  as  proposed  by 
Mr.  Randolph,  and  for  a  few  miscellaneous  provisions.  When 
compared  with  the  Constitution  as  it  stands,  what  is  there  of  a 
consolidating  aspect  that  can  be  offensive  to  those  who  applaud, 
approve,  or  are  satisfied  with  the  Constitution? 

Let  it  next  be  seen  what  were  the  powers  proposed  to  be 
lodged  in  the  Government  as  distributed  among  its  several  de- 
partments. 

The  Legislature,  each  branch  possessing  a  right  to  originate 
acts,  was  to  enjoy,  1.  The  legislative  rights  vested  in  the  Con- 
gress of  the  Confederation.  [This  must  be  free  from  objection, 
especially  as  the  powers  of  that  description  were  left  to  the  se- 
lection of  the  Convention.] 

2.  Cases  to  which  the  several  States  would  be  incompetent, 
or  in  which  the  harmony  of  the  United  States  might  be  inter- 
rupted by  individual  legislation.  [It  cannot  be  supposed  that 
these  descriptive  phrases  were  to  be  left  in  their  indefinite  ex- 
tent to  legislative  discretion.  A  selection  and  definition  of  the 
cases  embraced  by  them  was  to  be  the  task  of  the  Convention. 
If  there  could  be  any.  doubt  that  this  was  intended  and  so  un- 
derstood by  the  Convention,  it  would  be  removed  by  the  course 
of  proceeding  on  them  as  recorded  in  its  journal.  Many  of  the 
propositions  made  in  the  Convention  fall  within  this  remark; 
being,  as  is  not  unusual,  general  in  their  phrase,  but,  if  adopted, 
to  be  reduced  to  their  proper  shape  and  specification.] 

3.  To  negative  all  laws  passed  by  the  several  States,  contra- 
vening, in  the  opinion  of  the  national  Legislature,  the  articles 
of  union,  or  any  treaty  subsisting  under  their  authority.  [The 
necessity  of  some  constitutional  and  effective  provision,  guard- 
ins;  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  Union  against  violations 
of  them  by  the  laws  of  the  States,  was  felt  and  taken  for  granted 
by  all,  from  the  commencement  to  the  conclusion  of  the  work 


284  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

performed  by  the  Convention.  Every  vote  in  "the  journal  in- 
volving the  opinion,  proves  a  unanimity  among  the  deputations 
on  this  point.  A  voluntary  and  unvaried  concurrence  of  so 
many  (then  thirteen,  with  a  prospect  of  continued  increase)  dis- 
tinct and  independent  authorities  in  expounding  and  acting  on 
a  rule  of  conduct  which  must  be  the  same  for  all  or  in  force  in 
none,  was  a  calculation  forbidden  by  a  knowledge  of  human  na- 
ture, and  especially  so  by  the  experience  of  the  Confederacy, 
the  defects  of  which  were  to  be  supplied  by  the  Convention.] 

With  this  view  of  the  subject,  the  only  question  was,  the  mode 
of  control  on  the  individual  Legislatures.  This  might  be  either 
preventive  or  corrective;  the  former  by  a  negative  on  the  State 
laws,  the  latter  by  a  legislative  repeal,  by  a  judicial  supersedeas, 
or  by  an  administrative  arrest  of  them.  The  preventive  mode, 
as  the  best,  if  equally  practicable  with  the  corrective,  was 
brought  by  Mr.  Randolph  to  the  consideration  of  the  Conven- 
tion. It  was,  though  not  a  little  favoured,  as  appears  by  the 
votes  in  the  journal,  finally  abandoned  as  not  reducible  to 
practice.  Had  the  negative  been  assigned  to  the  Senatorial 
branch  of  the  Government  representing  the  State  Legislatures, 
thus  giving  to  the  whole  of  these  a  control  over  each,  the  expe- 
dient would  probably  have  been  still  more  favourably  received, 
though  even  in  that  form  subject  to  insuperable  objections,  in 
the  distance  of  many  of  the  State  Legislatures,  and  the  multi- 
plicity of  the  laws  of  each. 

Of  the  corrective  modes,  a  repeal  by  the  national  Legislature 
was  pregnant  with  inconveniences  rendering  it  inadmissible. 

The  only  remaining  safeguard  to  the  Constitution  and  laws 
of  the  Union  against  the  encroachment  of  its  members  and  an- 
archy among  themselves,  is  that  which  was  adopted,  in  the  dec- 
laration that  the  Constitution,  laws,  and  treaties  of  the  United 
States  should  be  the  supreme  law  of  the  land,  and,  as  such,  be 
obligatory  on  the  authorities  of  the  States  as  well  as  those  of 
the  United  States. 

The  last  of  the  proposed  legislative  powers  was  "  to  call  forth 
the  force  of  the  Union  against  any  member  failing  to  fulfil  its 
duty  under  the  articles  of  union." 


1833.  LETTERS.  055 

The  evident  object  of  this  provision  was  not  to  enlarge  the 
powers  of  the  proposed  Government, but  to  secure  their  efficiency. 
It  was  doubtless  suggested  by  the  inefficiency  of  the  confederate 
system,  from  the  want  of  such  a  sanction,  none  such  being  ex- 
pressed in  its  articles;  and  if,  as  Mr.  Jefferson*  argued,  neces- 
sarily implied,  having  never  been  actually  employed.  The  prop- 
osition, as  offered  by  Mr.  Randolph,  was  in  general  terms.  It 
might  have  been  taken  into  consideration  as  a  substitute  for,  or 
as  a  supplement  to,  the  ordinary  mode  of  enforcing  the  laws  by 
civil  process;  or  it  might  have  been  referred  to  cases  of  territo- 
rial or  other  controversies  between  States  and  a  refusal  of  the 
defeated  party  to  abide  by  the  decision;  leaving  the  alternative 
of  a  coercive  interposition  by  the  Government  of  the  Union,  or 
a  war  between  its  members  and  within  its  bowels.  Neither  of 
these  readings,  nor  any  other  which  the  language  would  bear, 
could  countenance  a  just  charge  on  the  deputation  or  on  Mr. 
Randolph  of  contemplating  a  consolidated  Government  with 
unlimited  powers. 

The  executive  powers  do  not  cover  more  ground  than  those 
inserted  by  the  Convention  to  whose  discretion  the  task  of  enu- 
merating them  was  submitted.  The  proposed  association  with 
the  executive  of  a  council  of  revision  could  not  give  a  consoli- 
dating feature  to  the  plan. 

The  judicial  power  in  the  plan  is  more  limited  than  the  juris- 
diction described  in  the  Constitution,  with  the  exception  of 
cases  of  "  impeachment  of  any  national  officer,"  and  questions 
which  involve  the  national  peace  and  harmony. 

The  trial  of  impeachments  is  known  to  be  one  of  the  most 
difficult  of  constitutional  arrangements.  The  reference  of  it  to 
the  judicial  department  may  be  presumed  to  have  been  suggested 
by  the  example  in  the  Constitution  of  Virginia.  The  option 
seemed  to  lie  between  that  and  the  other  departments  of  the 
Government,  no  example  of  an  organization  excluding  all  the 
departments  presenting  itself.  Whether  the  judicial  mode  pro- 
posed was  preferable  to  that  inserted  in  the  Constitution  or  not, 

*  See  bis  published  letter  of  August  4, 1787,  to  Edward  Carrington. 


286  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

the  difference  cannot  affect  the  question  of  a  consolidating  as- 
pect or  tendency. 

By  questions  involving  "  the  national  peace  and  harmony," 
no  one  can  suppose  more  was  meant  than  might  be  specified  by 
the  Convention  as  proper  to  be  referred  to  the  judiciary,  cither 
by  the  Constitution  or  the  constitutional  authority  of  the  Legis- 
lature. They  could  be  no  rule  in  that  latitude  to  a  court,  nor 
even  to  a  Legislature  witli  limited  powers. 

That  the  Convention  understood  the  entire  resolutions  of  Mr. 
Randolph  to  be  a  mere  sketch  in  which  omitted  details  were  to 
be  supplied,  and  the  general  terms  and  phrases  to  be  reduced  to 
their  proper  details,  is  demonstrated  by  the  use  made  of  them 
in  the  Convention.  They  were  taken  up  and  referred  to  a  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  in  that  sense;  discussed  one  by  one;  referred 
occasionally  to  special  committees,  to  committees  of  detail  on 
special  points,  at  length  to  a  committee  to  digest  and  report 
the  draught  of  a  Constitution,  and  finally  to  a  committee  of  ar- 
rangement and  diction. 

On  this  review  of  the  whole  subject,  candour  discovers  no 
ground  for  the  charge,  that  the  resolutions  contemplated  a  Gov- 
ernment materially  different  from,  or  more  national  than,  thai 
in  which  they  terminated,  and  certainly  no  ground  for  the  charge 
of  consolidating  views  in  those  from  whom  the  resolutions  pro- 
ceeded. 

What,  then,  is  the  ground  on  which  the  charge  rests?  It 
could  not  be  on  a  plea  that  the  plan  of  Mr.  Randolph  gave  un- 
limited powers  to  the  proposed  Government,  for  the  plan  ex- 
pressly aimed  at  a  specification,  and,  of  course,  a  limitation  of 
the  powers. 

It  could  not  be  on  the  supremacy  of  the  general  authority 
over  the  separate  authorities,  for  that  supremacy  is,  as  already 
noticed,  more  fully  and  emphatically  established  by  the  text  of 
the  Constitution. 

It  could  not  be  on  the  proposed  ratification  by  the  people  in- 
stead of  the  States,  for  such  is  the  ratification  on  which  the  Con- 
stitution is  founded. 

The  charge  must  rest  on  the  term  national,  prefixed  to  the 


1833.  LETTERS.  287 

organized  departments  in  the  propositions  of  Mr.  Randolph;  yet 
how  easy  is  it  to  account  for  the  use  of  the  term  without  taking 
it  in  a  consolidating  souse? 

In  the  first  place,  it  contradistinguished  the  proposed  Gov- 
ernment from  the  Confederacy  which  it  was  to  supersede. 

2.  As  the  system  was  to  be  a  new  and  compound  one.  a  non- 
descript without  a  technical  appellation  for  it,  the  term  "  na- 
tional "  was  very  naturally  suggested  by  its  national  features  : 
1.  In  being  established,  not  by  the  authority  of  State  Legisla- 
tures, but  by  the  original  authority  of  the  people.  2.  In  its 
organization  into  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  depart- 
ments; and,  3.  In  its  action  on  the  people  of  the  States  imme- 
diately, and  not  on  the  governments  of  the  States,  as  in  a  Con- 
federacy. 

But  what  alone  would  justify  and  account  for  the  application 
of  the  term  national  to  the  proposed  Government  is,  that  it 
would  possess,  exclusively,  all  the  attributes  of  a  National  Gov- 
ernment in  its  relations  with  other  nations,  including  the  most 
essential  one  of  regulating  foreign  commerce,  with  the  effective 
means  of  fulfilling  the  obligation  and  responsibility  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  to  other  nations.  Hence  it  was  that  the  term  na- 
tional was  at  once  so  readily  applied  to  the  new  Government, 
and  that  it  has  become  so  universal  and  familiar.  It  may  safely 
be  affirmed  that  the  same  would  have  been  the  case,  whatever 
name  might  have  been  given  to  it  by  the  propositions  of  Mr. 
Randolph  or  by  the  Convention.  A  Government  which  alone 
is  known  and  acknowledged  by  all  foreign  nations,  and  alone 
charged  with  the  international  relations,  could  not  fail  to  be 
deemed  and  called  at  home  a  National  Government. 

After  all,  in  discussing  and  expounding  the  character  and  im- 
port of  a  Constitution,  let  candour  decide  whether  it  be  not 
more  reasonable  and  just  to  interpret  the  name  or  title  by  facts 
on  the  face  of  it,  than  to  torture  the  facts  by  a  bed  of  Procrus- 
tes into  a  fitness  to  the  title. 

I  must  leave  it  to  yourself  to  judge  whether  this  exposition 
of  the  resolutions  in  question  be  not  sufficiently  reasonable  to 
protect  them  from  the  imputation  of  a  consolidating  tendency, 


2S8  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

and  still  more,  the  Virginia  Deputies  from  having  that  for  their 
object. 

With  regard  to  Mr.  Randolph  particularly,  is  not  some  re- 
spect due  to  his  public  letter  to  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Delegates,  in  which  he  gives  for  his  refusal  to  sign  the  Consti- 
tution, reasons  irreconcilable  with  the  supposition  that  he  could 
have  proposed  the  resolutions  in  a  [the?]  meaning  charged  on 
him?  Of  Colonel  Mason,  who  also  refused,  it  may  be  inferred, 
from  his  avowed  reasons,  that  he  could  not  have  acquiesced  in 
the  propositions  if  understood  or  intended  to  effect  a  consoli- 
dated Government. 

So  much  use  has  been  made  of  Judge  Yates's  minute-  of  the 
debates  in  the  Convention,  that  I  must  be  allowed  to  remark 
that  they  abound  in  inaccuracies,  and  are  not  free  from  gross 
errors,  some  of  which  do  much  injustice  to  the  arguments  and 
opinions  of  particular  members.  All  this  may  be  explained 
without  a  charge  of  wilful  misrepresentation,  by  the  very  desul- 
tory manner  in  which  his  notes  appear  to  have  been  taken;  his 
ear  catching  particular  expressions  and  losing  qualifications  of 
them;  and  by  prejudices  giving  to  his  mind  all  the  bias  which 
an  honest  one  could  feel.  He  and  his  colleague  were  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  dominant  party  in  New  York,  which  was  op- 
posed to  the  Convention  and  the  object  of  it;  which  was  averse 
to  any  essential  change  in  the  Articles  of  Confederation;  which 
had  inflexibly  refused  to  grant  even  a  duty  of  five  per  cent,  on 
imports  for  the  urgent  debts  of  the  Revolution;  which  was  avail- 
ing itself  of  the  peculiar  situation  of  New  York  for  taxing  the 
consumption  of  her  neighbours;  and  which  foresaw  that  a  pri- 
mary aim  of  the  Convention  would  be  to  transfer  from  the 
States  to  the  common  authority  the  entire  regulation  of  foreign 
commerce.  Such  were  the  feelings  of  the  tAvo  Deputies,  that, 
on  finding  the  Convention  bent  on  a  radical  reform  of  the  Fed- 
eral system,  they  left  it  in  the  midst  of  its  discussions,  and  be- 
fore the  opinions  and  views  of  many  of  the  members  were  drawn 
out  to  their  final  shape  and  practical  application. 

Without  impeaching  the  integrity  of  Luther  Martin,  it  may 
be  observed  of  him  also,  that  his  report  of  the  proceedings  of 


1833.  LETTER-.  289 

the  Convention,  during  his  stay  in  it,  shows,  by  its  colourings, 
that  his  feelings  wore  hut  too  much  mingled  with  his  statements 
and  inferences.  There  is  good  ground  for  believing  that  Mr. 
Martin  himself  became  sensible  of  this,  and  made  no  secret  of 
his  regret,  that  in  his  address  to  the  Legislature  of  his  State,  he 
had  been  betrayed,  by  the  irritated  state  of  his  mind,  into  a  pic- 
ture that  might  do  injustice  both  to  the  body  and  to  particular 
members. 


to  w.   c.  RIVES. 

MoxTrrLLiER,  March  12.  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  very  kind  letter  of  the  6th, 
from  Washington,  and  by  the  same  mail  a  copy  of  your  late 
speech  in  the  Senate,""  for  which  I  tender  my  thanks.  I  have 
found,  as  I  expected,  that  it  takes  a  very  able  and  enlightening 
view  of  its  subject.  I  wish  it  may  have  the  effect  of  reclaiming 
to  the  doctrine  and  language  held  by  all  from  the  birth  of  the 
Constitution,  and  till  very  lately  by  themselves,  those  who  now 
contend  that  the  States  have  never  parted  with  an  atom  of  their 
sovereignty;  and,  consequently,  that  the  constitutional  band 
which  holds  them  together  is  a  mere  league  or  partnership: 
without  any  of  the  characteristics  of  sovereignty  or  nationality. 

It  seems  strange  that  it  should  be  necessary  to  disprove  this 
novel  and  nullifying  doctrine;  and  stranger  still  that  those  who 
deny  it  should  be  denounced  as  innovators,  heretics,  and  apos- 
tates. Our  political  system  is  admitted  to  be  a  new  creation — 
a  real  nondescript.  Its  character,  therefore,  must  be  sought 
within  itself,  not  in  precedents,  because  there  are  none;  not  in 
writers  whose  comments  are  guided  by  precedents.  \yho  can 
tell,  at  present,  how  Yattel  and  others  of  that  class  would  have 
qualified  (in  the  Gallic  sense  of  the  term)  a  compound  and  pe- 
culiar system  with  such  an  example  of  it  as  ours  before  them? 

*  Speech  of  14th  February,  1833,  on  the  Bill  further  to  provide  for  the  collec- 
tion of  duties  on  imports,  intended  to  counteract  the  nullification  ordinance  of 
South  Carolina. 

VOL.  IV.  19 


290  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

What  can  be  more  preposterous  than  to  say  that  the  States, 
as  united,  arc  in  no  respect  or  degree  a  nation,  which  implies 
sovereignty;  although  acknowledged  to  be  such  by  all  other 
nations  and  sovereigns,  and  maintaining,  with  them,  all  the 
international  relations  of  war  and  peace,  treaties,  commerce, 
&c;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  and  at  the  same  time,  to  say  that 
the  States  separately  are  completely  nations  and  sovereignsj 
although  they  can  separately  neither  speak  nor  hearken  to  any 
other  nation,  nor  maintain  with  it  any  of  the  international  re- 
lations whatever,  and  would  be  disowned  as  nations  if  present- 
ing themselves  in  that  character? 

The  nullifiers,  it  appears,  endeavor  to  shelter  themselves  un- 
der a  distinction  between  a  delegation  and  a  surrender  of  pow- 
ers. But  if  the  powers  be  attributes  of  sovereignty  and  nation- 
ality, and  the  grant  of  them  be  perpetual,  as  is  necessarily  im- 
plied, where  not  otherwise  expressed,  sovereignty  and  nation- 
ality according  to  the  extent  of  the  grant  are  effectually  trans- 
ferred by  it,  and  a  dispute  about  the  name  is  but  a  battle  of 
words.  The  practical  result  is  not  indeed  left  to  argument  or 
inference.  The  words  of  the  Constitution  are  explicit  that  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States  shall  be  supreme 
over  the  constitution  and  laws  of  the  several  States;  supreme 
in  their  exposition  and  execution,  as  well  as  in  their  authority. 
Without  a  supremacy  in  these  respects,  it  would  be  like  a  scab- 
bard in  the  hand  of  a  soldier  without  a  sword  in  it.  The  im- 
agination itself  is  startled  at  the  idea  of  twenty-four  independ- 
ent expounders  of  a  rule  that  cannot  exist  but  in  a  meaning  and 
operation  the  same  for  all. 

The  conduct  of  South  Carolina  has  called  forth  not  only  the 
question  of  nullification,  but  the  more  formidable  one  of  seces- 
sion. \t  is  asked  whether  a  State,  by  resuming  the  sovereign 
form  in  which  it  entered  the  Union,  may  not  of  right  withdraw 
from  it  at  will.  As  this  is  a  simple  question,  whether  a  State, 
more  than  an  individual,  has  a  right  to  violate  its  engagements, 
it  would  seem  that  it  might  be  safely  left  to  answer  itself.  But 
the  countenance  given  to  the  claim  shows  that  it  cannot  be  so 
lightly  dismissed.     The  natural  feelings  which  laudably  attach 


1833.  LETTERS.  291 

the  people  composing  a  State  to  its  authority  and  importance, 
are  at  present  too  much  excited  by  the  unnatural  feelings  with 
which  they  have  been  inspired  against  their  brethren  of  other 
States  not  to  expose  them  to  the  danger  of  being  misled  into 
erroneous  views  of  the  nature  of  the  Union  and  the  interest 
they  have  in  it.  One  thing,  at  least,  seems  to  be  too  clear  to 
be  questioned;  that  while  a  State  remains  within  the  Union  it 
cannot  withdraw  its  citizens  from  the  operation  of  the  Consti- 
tution and  laws  of  the  Union.  In  the  event  of  an  actual  seces- 
sion without  the  consent  of  the  co-States,  the  course  to  be  pur- 
sued by  these  involves  questions  painful  in  the  discussion  of 
them.  God  grant  that  the  menacing  appearances  which  ob- 
truded it  may  not  be  followed  by  positive  occurrences  requiring 
the  more  painful  task  of  deciding  them! 

In  explaining  the  proceedings  of  Virginia  in  1798-99,  the 
state  of  things  at  that  time  was  the  more  properly  appealed  to 
as  it  has  been  too  much  overlooked.  The  doctrines  combated 
are  always  a  key  to  the  arguments  employed.  It  is  but  too 
common  to  read  the  expressions  of  a  remote  period  through  the 
modern  meaning  of  them,  and  to  omit  guards  against  miscon- 
struction not  anticipated.  A  few  words  with  a  prophetic  gift 
might  have  prevented  much  error  in  the  proceedings.  The  re- 
mark is  equally  applicable  to  the  Constitution  itself. 

Having  thrown  these  thoughts  on  paper  in  the  midst  of  in- 
terruptions, added  to  other  dangers  of  inaccuracy,  I  will  ask 
the  favor  of  you  to  return  the  letter  after  perusal.  I  have  lat- 
terly taken  this  liberty  with  more  than  one  of  my  correspond- 
ing friends,  and  every  lapse  of  very  short  periods  becomes  now 
a  fresh  apology  for  it. 

Neither  Mrs.  Madison  nor  myself  have  forgotten  the  prom- 
ised visit,  which  included  Mrs.  Rives,  and  we  flatter  ourselves 
the  fulfilment  of  it  will  not  be  very  distant.  Meanwhile  we 
tender  to  you  both  our  joint  and  affectionate  salutations. 

P.  S.  I  enclose  a  little  pamphlet  received  a  few  days  ago, 
which  so  well  repaid  my  perusal  that  I  submit  it  to  yours,  to 
be  returned  only  at  your  leisure.   It  is  handsomely  written,  and 


292  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

its  matter  well  chosen  and  interesting.  A  like  task  as  well  ex- 
ecuted in  every  State  would  he  of  historical  value;  the  more  so 
as  the  examples  might  both  prompt  and  guide  researches,. not 
as  yet  too  late,  but  rapidly  becoming  so. 


TO   BARON   DE   HUMBOLDT. 

Mikch  12,  1833. 

Will  you  permit  me,  my  dear  Baron,  after  such  an  oblivious 
lapse  of  time,  to  recall  myself  to  you  by  a  few  lines  introducing 
Professor  Hoffman,  who  fills,  with  distinguished  qualifications, 
the  Chair  of  Law  in  the  University  of  Maryland?  He  is  about 
to  take  a  look  at  Europe,  and  will  be  particularly  gratified  by 
an  opportunity  of  paying  his  respects  to  one  whose  fruitful 
genius,  philosophical  researches,  and  moral  excellences,  have 
given  him  so  high  a  rank  everywhere  among  the  benefactors  of 
science  and  humanity. 

Mr.  Hoffman  will  be  able  to  give  you  whatever  information 
may  be  desired  concerning  his  own  country,  in  the  destinies  of 
which  you  have  taken  a  philanthropic  interest.  You  intimated 
once,  that  the  unscrutinized  region  of  which  it  makes  a  part 
offered  physical  attractions  to  another  voyage  across  the  Atlan- 
tic. To  those  would  now  be  added  a  different  one  in  the  effect 
of  our  political  institutions  in  a  period  of  twenty  years  on  our 
national  growth,  features,  and  condition. 

There  may  be  little  hope  now  that  a  fulfilment  of  your  origi- 
nal intention  would  be  compatible  with  the  many  interesting  de- 
mands on  your  time  elsewhere.  I  can  only  assure  you,  there- 
fore, that  on  a  more  favorable  supposition,  you  would  nowhere 
be  welcomed  by  more  general  gratulations  than  among  the  citi- 
zens of  the  United  States;  and  that  if  the  contingency  should 
fall  within  the  short  span  of  life  remaining  to  me,  I  shall  be 
second  to  none  of  them  in  the  sincerity  of  mine. 

Mrs.  Madison,  not  having  forgotten  the  pleasure  afforded  by 
the  few  social  days  passed  at  Washington,  begs  to  be  joined  in 
the  homage  and  all  the  good  wishes  which  I  pray  you  to  accept. 


1833.  LETTERS.  203 


TO    DANIEL   WEBSTER. 

Montphlmeb,  March  15,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  return  my  thanks  for  the  copy  of  your  late  very 
powerful  speech  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  It  crushes 
"  nullification,"  and  must  hasten  the  abandonment  of  "  secession." 
But  this  dodges  the  blow,  by  confounding  the  claim  to  secede 
at  will  with  the  right  of  seceding  from  intolerable  oppression. 
The  former  answers  itself,  being  a  violation,  without  cause,  of  a 
faith  solemnly  pledged.  The  latter  is  another  name  only  for 
revolution,  about  which  there  is  no  theoretic  controversy.  Its 
double  aspect,  nevertheless,  with  the  countenance  received  from 
certain  quarters,  is  giving  it  a  popular  currency  here  which  may 
influeuce  the  approaching  elections  both  for  Congress  and  for 
the  State  Legislature.  It  has  gained  some  advantage,  also,  by 
mixing  itself  with  the  question  whether  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  was  formed  by  the  people  or  by  the  States,  now 
under  a  theoretic  discussion  by  animated  partisans. 

It  is  fortunate  when  disputed  theories  can  be  decided  by  un- 
disputed facts.  And  here  the  undisputed  fact  is,  that  the  Con- 
stitution was  made  by  the  people,  but  as  imbodied  into  the  sev- 
eral States  who  were  parties  to  it,  and,  therefore,  made  by  the 
States  in  their  highest  authoritative  capacity.  They  might,  by 
the  same  authority  and  by  the  same  process,  have  converted  the 
Confederacy  into  a  mere  league  or  treaty;  or  continued  it  with 
enlarged  or  abridged  powers;  or  have  imbodied  the  people  of 
their  respective  States  into  one  people,  nation^  or  sovereignty; 
or,  as  they  did  by  a  mixed  form,  make  them  one  people,  nation, 
or  sovereignty  for  certain  purposes,  and  not  so  for  others. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  being  established  by  a 
competent  authority,  by  that  of  the  sovereign  people  of  the  seve- 
ral States  who  were  the  parties  to  it,  it  remains  only  to  inquire 
what  the  Constitution  is;  and  here  it  speaks  for  itself.  It  organ- 
izes a  government  into  the  usual  legislative,  executive,  and  judi- 
ciary departments;  invests  it  with  specified  powers,  leaving  others 
to  the  parties  to  the  Constitution;  it  makes  the  Government,  like 
other  governments,  to  operate  directly  on  the  people;  places  at 


294  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

its  command  the  needful  physical  means  of  executing  its  powers; 
and,  finally,  proclaims  its  supremacy,  and  that  of  the  laws  made 
in  pursuance  of  it,  over  the  constitutions  and  laws  of  the  States; 
the  powers  of  the  Government  being  exercised,  as  in  other  elec- 
tive and  responsible  governments,  under  the  control  of  its  con- 
stituents, the  people  and  legislatures  of  the  States,  and  subject 
to  the  revolutionary  rights  of  the  people  in  extreme  cases. 

It  might  have  been  added,  that  while  the  Constitution,  there- 
fore, is  admitted  to  be  in  force,  its  operation  in  every  respect 
must  be  precisely  the  same,  whether  its  authority  be  derived 
from  that  of  the  people  in  the  one  or  the  other  of  the  modes  in 
question,  the  authority  being  equally  competent  in  both;  and 
that,  without  an  annulment  of  the  Constitution  itself,  its  suprem- 
acy must  be  submitted  to. 

The  only  distinctive  effect  between  the  two  modes  of  forming 
a  constitution  by  the  authority  of  the  people,  is,  that  if  formed 
by  them  as  imbodied  into  separate  communities,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  a  dissolution  of  the 
constitutional  compact  would  replace  them  in  the  condition  of 
separate  communities,  that  being  the  condition  in  which  they 
entered  into  the  compact;  whereas,  if  formed  by  the  people  as 
one  community,  acting  as  such  by  a  numerical  majority,  a  disso- 
lution of  the  compact  would  reduce  them  to  a  state  of  nature,  as 
so  many  individual  persons.  But  while  the  constitutional  com- 
pact remains  undissolved,  it  must  be  executed  according  to  the 
forms  and  provisions  specified  in  the  compact.  It  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  compact,  express  or  implied,  is  the  vital  principle 
of  free  governments  as  contradistinguished  from  governments 
not  free;  and  that  a  revolt  against  this  principle  leaves  no  choice 
but  between  anarchy  and  despotism. 


TO   JOSEPH   C.    CABELL. 

Montpellier,  April  1,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  received,  by  the  last  mail,  yours  from  Albe- 
marle, with  the  documents  referred  to.   That  from  Nelson,  with 


1833.  LETTERS.  295 

its  accompaniments,  had  previously  come  to  band.  I  regret 
much  my  loss  of  a  visit  which  I  was  so  near  being  favoured 
with.  Besides  the  personal  gratifications  it  would  have  afforded 
me,  we  could  not  well  have  been  together  without  touching  on 
topics  not  personal,  and  on  which  our  ideas  might  be  worth  in- 
terchanging. 

As  to  the  suggestion  of  a  pamphlet  comprising  some  of  my 
letters  on  constitutional  questions,  it  may  be  remarked  that  this 
has,  as  I  understand,  been  lately  done  with  respect  to  some  of 
them — those  to  Mr.  Everett  and  Mr.  Ingersoll,  if  no  more.  Nor 
could  such  a  task  be  now  executed  in  time  for  any  critical  in- 
fluence on  public  opinion.  Whether  it  may  become  expedient 
during  the  next  winter  will  be  decided  by  the  intermediate  turn 
and  complexion  of  the  politics  of  the  country. 

I  had  noticed  the  charge  of  inconsistency  against  me,  but  it 
had  been  so  often  refuted  on  different  occasions  and  from  differ- 
ent quarters,  that  I  was  content  to  let  it  die  of  its  wounds. 
There  would,  indeed,  be  no  end  to  refutations  if  applied  to  every 
repetition  of  unfounded  imputations.  The  attempt  to  prove  me 
a  nullifier,  by  a  misconstruction  of  the  resolutions  of  1798-99, 
though  so  often  and  so  lately  corrected,  was,  I  observe,  renewed 
some  days  ago  in  the  Richmond  Whig,  by  an  inference  from  an 
erasure  in  the  House  of  Delegates  from  one  of  those  resolutions, 
of  the  words,  "  are  null,  void,  and  of  no  effect,"  which  followed 
the  word  "  constitutional."  These  words,  though  synonymous 
with  "  unconstitutional,"  were  alleged  by  the  critic  to  mean  nul- 
lification; and  being,  of  course,  ascribed  to  me,  I  was,  of  course, 
a  nullifier.  It  seems  not  to  have  occurred,  that  if  the  insertion 
of  the  words  could  convict  me  of  being  a  nullifier,  the  erasure 
of  them  [unanimous,  I  believe]  by  the  Legislature  was  the 
strongest  of  protests  against  the  doctrine;  a  consideration  of 
infinitely  more  importance  than  any  opinion  of  mine,  if  real, 
could  be.  The  vote  in  that  case  seems  not  to  have  engaged  the 
attention  due  to  it.  It  not  merely  deprives  South  Carolina  of 
the  authority  of  Virginia,  on  which  she  has  relied  and  exulted 
so  much  in  support  of  her  cause,  but  turns  that  authority  point- 
edly against  her. 


295  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

Li  referring  to  this  incident  I  am  reminded  of  another  erasure 
from  one  of  the  resolutions.  After  the  word  "  States,"  as  par- 
ties to  the  compact,  the  word  "  alone  "  was  inserted.  This  was 
unanimously  stricken  out.  I  was  always  at  a  loss  for  the  rea- 
son, till  it  was  lately  stated,  on  the  authority  of  Mr.  Giles,  that 
the  word  was  considered  by  some  as  excluding  the  people  of  a 
State  from  being  a  party  to  the  compact.  The  word  was  not 
meant  to  guard  against  that  misconstruction,  which  was  not  ap- 
prehended, the  people  being  the  State  itself  when  acting  in  its 
highest  capacity,  but  to  exclude  the  idea  of  the  State  govern- 
ments or  the  Federal  Government  being  a  party.  The  common 
notion  previous  to  our  Revolution  had  been,  that  the  governmen- 
tal compact  was  between  the  Governors  and  the  governed;  the 
former  stipulating  protection,  the  latter  allegiance.  So  familiar 
was  this  view  of  the  subject  that  it  slipped  into  the  speech  of 
Mr.  Hayne  on  Foot's  resolution,  and  produced  the  prostrating 
reply  of  Mr.  Webster.  So  apt,  also,  was  the  distinction  between 
a  State  and  its  government  to  be  overlooked,  that  Judge  Roane, 
with  all  his  sagacity  and  orthodoxy,  was  betrayed  into  a  lan- 
guage that  made  the  State  government  a  party  to  the  constitu- 
tional compact  of  the  United  States.  In  the  fifth  letter  of  his 
"Algernon  Sidney,"  he  says:  "  If  without  this  jurisdiction  [of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States]  now  claimed,  it  is  al- 
leged that  danger  will  ensue  to  the  constitutional  rights  of  the 
General  Government,  let  us  not  forget  that  there  is  another 
party  to  the  compact.  That  party  is  the  State  governments,  who 
ought  not  to  be  deprived  of  their  only  defensive  armour." 

What  an  example  is  here,  where  it  would  be  so  little  looked 
for,  of  the  erroneous  and  one-sided  view  so  often  taken  of  the 
relations  between  the  Federal  and  the  State  governments!  Is 
it  not  obvious  that  the  jurisdiction  claimed  for  the  Slates  is  not 
their  only  defensive  armour?  and  that  another  and  more  com- 
plete defence  is  in  the  responsibility  of  the  Federal  Government 
to  the  people  and  Legislatures  of  the  States  as  its  constituents? 
whereas  the  jurisdiction  claimed  for  the  Federal  Judiciary  is 
truly  the  only  defensive  armour  of  the  Federal  Government, 
or,  rather,  for  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States. 


1833.  LETTERS.  297 

Strip  it  of  that  armour,  and  the  door  is  wide  open  for  nullifica- 
tion, anarchy,  and  convulsion,  unless  twenty-four  States,  inde- 
pendent of  the  whole  and  of  each  other,  should  exhibit  the  mir- 
acle of  a  voluntary  and  unanimous  performance  of  every  injunc- 
tion of  the  parchment  compact. 

I  must  not  let  the  occasion  pass  without  congratulating  you  on 
your  successful  progress  in  the  arduous  and  patriotic  plan  of 
connecting  the  West  and  the  East  by  a  route  through  Virginia. 
I  wish  you  may  continue  to  triumph  over  all  the  difficulties  to 
be  encountered.  Such  works  are  among  the  antidotes  to  the 
poisonous  doctrines  of  disunion,  as  well  as  otherwise  of  the  most 
beneficial  tendencies. 


TO   GEORGE   W.    BASSETT,    CHAIRMAN    OF   THE    MONUMENTAL    COM- 
MITTEE. 

Montpelliek,  April  30,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  25th  instant, 
which  requests  my  company  at  the  laying  of  the  corner-stone  of 
the  proposed  Monument  to  the  memory  of  the  Mother  of  Wash- 
ington. 

I  feel  much  regret  that  my  very  advanced  age,  to  which  is 
added  a  continued  indisposition,  will  not  permit  me  to  be  pres- 
ent on  an  occasion  commemorative  of  the  mother  of  him  who 
was  the  Father  of  his  own  Country,  and  has  left  in  his  example 
and  his  counsels  a  rich  legacy  to  every  country. 

Be  pleased  to  accept,  sir,  for  yourself  and  your  colleagues  of 
the  Monumental  Committee,  the  expression  of  my  cordial  re- 
spects. 


TO   BENJAMIN   F.    PAPOON. 

Montpellier,  May  18,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  favor  of  the  13th  ult.  was  duly  received, 
and  I  thank  you  for  the  communication. 


298  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  rapid  growth  of  the  individual 
States  in  population,  wealth,  and  power  must  tend  to  weaken 
the  ties  which  bind  them  together.  A  like  tendency  results 
from  the  absence  and  oblivion  of  external  danger,  the  most  pow- 
erful control  on  disuniting  propensities  in  the  parts  of  a  politi- 
cal community.  To  these  changes  in  the  condition  of  the  States, 
impairing  the  cement  of  their  union,  are  now  added  the  language 
and  zeal  which  inculcate  an  incompatibility  of  interests  between 
different  sections  of  the  country,  and  an  oppression  on  the 
minor  by  the  major  section,  which  must  engender  in  the  former 
a  resentment  amounting  to  serious  hostility. 

Happily  these  alienating  tendencies  are  not  without  counter 
tendencies,  in  the  complicated  frame  of  our  political  system;  in 
the  geographical  and  commercial  relations  among  the  States, 
which  form  so  many  links  and  ligaments,  thwarting  a  separation 
of  them;  in  the  gradual  diminution  of  conflicting  interests  be- 
tween the  great  sections  of  country,  by  a  surplus  of  labour  in 
the  agricultural  section,  assimilating  it  to  the  manufacturing 
section;  or  by  such  a  success  of  the  latter,  without  obnoxious 
aids,  as  will  substitute  for  the  foreign  supplies  which  have  been 
the  occasion  of  our  discords,  those  internal  interchanges  which 
are  beneficial  to  every  section;  and,  finally,  in  the  obvious  con- 
sequences of  disunion,  by  which  the  value  of  union  is  to  be  cal- 
culated. 

Still  the  increasing  self-confidence  felt  by  the  members  of  the 
Union,  the  decreasing  influence  of  apprehensions  from  with- 
out, and  the  natural  aspirations  of  talented  ambition  for  new 
theatres,  multiplying  the  chances  of  elevation  in  the  lottery  of 
political  life,  may  require  the  co-operation  of  whatever  moral 
causes  may  aid  in  preserving  the  equilibrium  contemplated  by 
the  theory  of  our  compound  Government.  Among  these  causes 
may  justly  be  placed  appeals  to  the  love  and  pride  of  country; 
and  few  could  be  made  in  a  form  more  touching  than  a  well- 
executed  picture  of  the  magical  effect  of  our  national  emblem, 
in  converting  the  furious  passions  of  a  tumultuous  soldiery  into 
an  enthusiastic  respect  for  the  free  and  united  people  whom  it 
represented. 


1833.  LETTERS.  299 

How  far  the  moral  effect  of  the  proposed  exhibition  may  be 
countervailed  by  charging  it  with  a  party,  instead  of  a  national 
object,  I  cannot  judge.  That  it  should  have  originated  in  South 
Carolina  may  be  well  accounted  for  by  the  recent  occurrences 
in  that  State,  and  particularly  by  the  circumstance  that  the 
prominent  figure  in  the  scene  was  one  of  her  gallant  and  patri- 
otic sons.  Should  the  original  painting  be  consigned  to  a  na- 
tional depository,  it  will  so  far  also  give  a  nationality  to  its 
character  and  object. 

The  tenor  of  your  polite  and  friendly  letter  has  led  me  into 
observations  some  of  which  may  be  more  free  than  pertinent. 
I  let  them  pass,  however,  in  a  letter  which  is  marked  private. 
Every  day  added  to  my  prolonged  life  increases  my  anxiety  not 
to  be  brought  into  public  view.  When  age  becomes  an  answer 
to  argument,  as  it  usually  does  at  a  period  much  short  of  mine, 
it  is  a  signal  for  self-distrust  as  well  as  for  avoiding  obtrusions 
on  public  attention. 

I  owe  you  an  apology  for  so  tardy  an  acknowledgment  of 
your  favor.  Such  has  been  latterly  the  state  of  my  health,  as  to 
require  a  respite  from  the  use  of  the  pen. 


TO   HENRY   CLAY. 

June,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  May  28  was  duly  received.  In  it 
you  ask  my  opinion  on  the  retention  of  the  land  bill  by  the 
President. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  Constitution  meant  to  allow  the  Presi- 
dent an  adequate  time  to  consider  the  bills,  <fec,  presented 
to  him,  and  to  make  his  objections  to  them;  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  that  Congress  should  have  time  to  consider  and  over- 
rule the  objections.  A  disregard  on  either  side  of  what  it 
owes  to  the  other  must  be  an  abuse  for  which  it  would  be  re- 
sponsible under  the  forms  of  the  Constitution.  An  abuse  on  the 
part  of  the  President,  with  a  view  sufficiently  manifest,  in  a  case 
of  sufficient  magnitude  to  deprive  Congress  of  the  opportunity 


JOO  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

of  overruling  objections  to  their  bills,  might  doubtless  be  a 
ground  for  impeachment.  But  nothing  short  of  the  signature  of 
the  President,  or  a  lapse  of  ten  days  without  a  return  of  his  ob- 
jections, or  an  overruling  of  the  objections  by  two-thirds  of  each 
House  of  Congress,  can  give  legal  validity  to  a  bill.  In  order 
to  qualify  [in  the  French  sense  of  the  term]  the  retention  of  the 
land  bill  by  the  President,  the  first  inquiry  is,  whether  a  suffi- 
cient time  was  allowed  him  to  decide  on  its  merits;  the  next, 
whether,  with  a  sufficient  time  to  prepare  his  objections,  lie  un- 
necessarily put  it  out  of  the  power  of  Congress  to  decide  on 
them.  How  far  an  anticipated  passage  of  the  bill  ought  to  en- 
ter into  the  sufficiency  of  the  time  for  Executive  deliberation  is 
another  point  for  consideration.  A  minor  one  may  be,  whether 
a  silent  retention,  or  an  assignment  to  Congress  of  the  reasons 
for  it,  be  the  mode  most  suitable  to  such  occasions. 

I  hope,  with  you,  that  the  compromising  tariff  will  have  a 
course  and  effect  avoiding  a  renewal  of  the  contest  between  the 
South  and  the  North,  and  that  a  lapse  of  nine  or  ten  years  will 
enable  the  manufacturers  to  swim  without  the  bladders  which 
have  supported  them.  Many  considerations  favour  such  a  pros- 
pect. They  will  be  saved  in  future  much  of  the  expense  in  fix- 
tures which  they  had  to  encounter,  and  in  many  instances  un- 
necessarily incurred.  They  will  be  continually  improving  in 
the  management  of  their  business.  They  will  not  fail  to  im- 
prove occasionally  on  the  machinery  abroad.  The  reduction  of 
duties  on  imported  articles  consumed  by  them  will  be  equiva- 
lent to  a  direct  bounty.  There  will  probably  be  an  increasing 
cheapness  of  food  from  the  increasing  redundancy  of  agricultural 
labour.  There  will,  within  the  experimental  period,  be  an  ad- 
dition of  four  or  five  millions  to  our  population,  no  part  or  little 
of  which  will  be  needed  for  agricultural  labour,  and  which  will 
consequently  be  an  extensive  fund  of  manufacturing  recruits. 
The  current  experience  makes  it  probable  that  not  less  than 
fifty  or  sixty  thousand,  or  more,  of  emigrants  will  annually 
reach  the  United  States,  a  large  proportion  of  whom  will  have 
been  trained  to  manufactures  and  be  ready  for  that  employ- 
ment. 


1533.  LETTERS.  301 

With  respect  to  Virginia,  it  is  quite  probable,  from  the  pro- 
gress already  made  in  the  Western  culture  of  tobacco,  and  the 
rapid  exhaustion  of  her  virgin  soil,  in  which  alone  it  can  be  cul- 
tivated with  a  chance  of  profit,  that,  of  the  forty  or  fifty  thou- 
sand labourers  on  tobacco,  the  greater  part  will  be  released  from 
that  employment  and  be  applicable  to  that  of  manufactures.  It 
is  well  known  that  the  farming  system  requires  much  fewer 
hands  than  tobacco  fields. 

Should  a  war  break  out  in  Europe,  involving  the  manufac- 
turing nations,  the  rise  of  the  wages  there  will  be  another  brace 
to  the  manufacturing  establishments  here.  It  will  do  more;  it 
will  prove  to  the  "  absolutists  "  for  free  trade  that  there  is,  in 
the  contingency  of  war,  one  exception  at  least  to  their  theory.* 

It  is  painful  to  observe  the  unceasing  efforts  to  alarm  the 
South  by  imputations  against  the  North  of  unconstitutional  de- 
signs on  the  subject  of  the  slaves.  You  are  right,  I  have  no 
doubt,  in  believing  that  no  such  intermeddling  disposition  ex- 
ists in  the  body  of  our  Northern  brethren.  Their  good  faith  is 
sufficiently  guarantied  by  the  interest  they  have  as  merchants, 
as  ship-owners,  and  as  manufacturers,  in  preserving  a  union 
with  the  slaveholding  States.  On  the  other  hand,  what  mad- 
ness in  the  South  to  look  for  greater  safety  in  disunion.  It  would 
be  worse  than  jumping  out  of  the  frying-pan  into  the  fire:  it 
would  be  jumping  into  the  fire  for  fear  of  the  frying-pan.  The 
danger  from  the  alarm  is,  that  the  pride  and  resentment  exerted 
by  them  may  be  an  over-match  for  the  dictates  of  prudence,  and 
favor  the  project  of  a  Southern  Convention,  insidiously  revived, 
as  promising,  by  its  councils,  the  best  securities  against  griev- 
ances of  every  sort  from  the  North. 

The  case  of  the  tariff  and  land  bills  cannot  fail  of  an  influence 
on  the  question  of  your  return  to  the  next  session  of  Congress. 
They  are  both  closely  connected  with  the  public  repose. 

*  This  clause  overlooked  in  the  letter  sent  to  Mr.  Clay. 


302  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

TO   P.   R.   FENDALL. 

Montpellieh,  June  12,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  6th  instant, 
containing,  among  other  communications  on  the  part  of  the 
Managers  of  the  Colonization  Society,  [?]  the  exhausted  state 
of  its  treasury.  This  is  the  more  to  be  lamented,  as  it  is  in  one 
view  an  indication  [un?]  favorable  to  the  interesting  object  for 
which  the  Society  was  formed.  I  hope  the  late  circular  appeal 
of  the  Board  of  Managers  to  the  friends  of  that  object  will  not 
be  without  effect. 

You  will  be  so  good  as  to  place  the  inclosed  fifty  dollars  in 
the  proper  depository,  and  to  accept  my  friendly  salutations. 


TO   BENJAMIN   WATERHOUSE. 

Montpklliee,  June  21,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  30th  ult.  was  duly  received 
with  the  little  volume  to  which  it  refers.  The  facts  contained 
in  this  are  an  acceptable  appendix  to  the  stock  of  information 
on  a  subject  which  has  awakened  much  curiosity.  I  the  less 
wonder  at  the  relish  shewn  for  such  a  treat  as  you  have  pro- 
vided, considering  the  plums  and  the  sauce  you  have  added  to 
the  pudding. 

Although  the  state  of  my  eyes  permits  me  to  read  but  little, 
and  my  rheumatic  fingers  abhor  the  pen,  I  did  not  resist  the  at- 
traction of  your  literary  present,  and  I  drop  you  a  line  to  thank 
you  for  it.  Mrs.  Madison's  eyes  being  in  the  same  state  with 
mine,  we  found  it  convenient  to  read  in  a  sort  of  partnership; 
and  you  may  consider  her  as  a  partner  also  in  the  thanks  for  it. 
Should  you  enlarge  a  new  edition,  as  you  hint,  by  the  introduc- 
tion of  a  Pocahontas  or  two  among  the  dramatis  jpersowce,  the 
redness  of  the  skin  would  not,  in  her  eyes,  impair  the  merits  it 
would  cover.  She  offers  a  return  of  your  kind  remembrances, 
and  joins  me  in  the  cordial  respects  and  all  good  wishes  which 
I  pray  you  to  accept. 


1833.  LETTERS.  303 


TO   PROFESSOR   TUCKER. 

July  6,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  inclose  my  answers  to  two  letters  from  Mr. 
Jefferson  referred  to  in  your  inquiries  through  Dr.  Dunglison. 
They  are  in  the  form  of  extracts,  the  answers,  one  of  them  more 
particularly,  containing  irrelative  paragraphs  not  free  from  del- 
icate personalities.  You  will  have  noticed  the  letter  of  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson to  Dr.  Gem  immediately  following  that  of  Sep1  6  [1789] 
to  me,  as  explaining  the  age  of  a  generation. 

My  letter  of  Octr  17,  '88,  appears  to  have  been  written  cur- 
rente  calamo.  Perhaps  an  extract  from  the  extract  may  suffice 
for  your  purpose. 

The  objection  to  the  power  of  treaties  made  by  the  States  had, 
as  noted  in  my  letter  of  Oct.,  '88,  particular  reference  to  the 
British  Treaty  on  the  subject  of  debts,  the  source  of  so  much 
subsequent  agitation. 

It  is  observable  that  Mr.  Jefferson,  in  his  letter  of  March  15, 
'89,  says,  "  this  instrument  [the  Constitution  of  U.  S.]  forms  us 
into  one  State,  for  certain  objects,"  &c.  In  a  number  of  other 
places,  if  I  mistake  not,  he  speaks  of  the  Constitution  as  making 
us  one  people  and  one  nation  for  certain  purposes.  Yet  his  au- 
thority is  made  to  support  the  doctrine  that  the  States  have 
parted  with  none  of  their  sovereignty  or  nationality. 


to  w.  c.  RIVES. 

Montpellieb,  August  2,  1833. 

Your  favor  of  the  28  ult.  was,  my  dear  sir,  duly  received.  I 
thank  you  for  Mr.  Tyler's  pamphlet,  with  the  accompanying 
newspaper;  and  I  thank  you  still  more  for  the  friendly  dispo- 
sition you  express  on  the  subjects  of  them,  as  they  relate  to  me. 
If  I  mistake  not,  Mr.  T.  has  omitted  in  his  pamphlet  a  passage 
in  the  newspaper  edition  of  his  speech,  which  was  levelled 
against  the  Virginia  Deputies  to  the  Convention  of  1787  gen- 
erally, as  well  as  against  Mr.  Randolph  and  myself. 


304  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

Should  my  health  permit,  which  has  varied  a  little  the  -wrong 
way  latterly,  I  will  endeavor  to  point  to  some  of  the  errors  of 
"  Mutius,"  if  not  of  Mr.  T.  also,  in  the  views  they  have  taken 
of  my  political  career. 

Dr.  Mason  and  his  companion  called  on  me  last  evening  and 
left  me  this  morning,  duly  impressed  with  their  title  to  your  in- 
troduction. I  learnt  from  them,  that,  with  Mrs.  Rives,  you  will 
soon  be  under  weigh  [way?]  for  the  Springs,  and,  of  course,  for 
some  time  beyond  any  communication  with  you.  I  hope  the 
excursion  will  have  every  advantage  in  confirming  your  health. 
We  ,ai*e  glad  to  understand  that  the  health  of  Mrs.  Rives  needs 
no  aid  of  any  sort.  Mrs.  Madison  joins  in  respectful  and  affec- 
tionate salutations  to  you  both. 


TO   GALES   &   SEATON. 

August  5.  1833. 

I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  29th  ult°.  The  task  in 
which  you  are  engaged  is  a  very  interesting  one.  and  I  should 
feel  much  pleasure  in  aiding  your  researches  for  the  necessary 
materials.     But  my  recollections  are  very  barren. 

I  know  of  no  "debates"  during  the  period  of  Lloyd's,  but 
his,  which  are  very  defective  and  abound  in  errors,  some  of  them 
very  gross,  where  the  speeches  were  not  revised  by  the  authors. 
If  there  be  any  depositories  of  what  passed,  they  must  be  the 
cotemporary  newspapers  or  periodicals,  to  be  found,  I  presume, 
in  public  Libraries.  Whilst  Congress  sat  in  New  York,  Fenno 
was  the  printer  most  to  be  looked  to.  On  the  removal  to  Phil- 
adelphia, Freneau 's  National  Gazette  was  the  favorite  of  the 
other  party,  aixl  contains  reports  of  the  debates,  at  least  in  some 
instances,  when  the  speakers  revised  them.  Whether  the  same 
be  not  in  Fenno,  also,  or  in  other  Gazettes  of  the  day,  or  repub- 
lished in  Carey's  Musoum,  or  other  periodicals,  I  cannot  say. 
If  there  be  any  difference  between  Freneau  and  Fenno  in  a 
speech  of  mine,  Freneau  gives  the  correct  one.     Freneau's  Ga- 


1833.  LETTERS.  305 

zette,  T  should  suppose,  would  be  among  the  bound  newspapers 
in  the  Library  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  now  in  that  of  Congress.  Cal- 
ender and  Carpenter  took  the  debates  at  one  period;  but  they 
probably  make  a  part  of  those  published  by  Fenno,  Brown, 
Dnnlap,  and  Duane. 

I  do  not  possess  a  manuscript  copy  of  a  single  speech,  having 
never  writ  (en  one  beforehand,  nor  corrected  the  reporter's  notes 
of  one  beyond  making  it  faithful  in  substance,  and  to  be  reported 
as.  such  in  the  third,  not  in  the  first  person. 

You  yielded  too  much  to  an  apprehension  that  a  visit  might 
not  in  ray  condition  be  convenient  to  me.  You  would  have 
been  welcomed  with  the  respect  and  cordiality  of  which  I  now 
beg  you  to  accept  the  assurance. 


TO   THOMAS    S.    GRIMKE. 

August  10,  1833. 

DR  Sir, — I  owe  you  many  thanks  for  the  several  communica- 
tions with  which  you  have  from  time  to  time  favored  me  since 
the  date  of  my  last;  and  I  owe  you  many  apologies  for  the  de- 
lay in  acknowledging  them.  The  last  favors  just  received  are 
your  "  Oration  on  the  4th  of  July,"  and  your  "  letter  on  temper- 
ance." In  all  of  them  I  recognise  the  same  ability,  accurate  in- 
formation, and  eloquence,  the  same  vein  of  patriotic  solicitude 
and  Christian  benevolence,  by  which  your  pen  has  always  been 
characterized.  My  present  knowledge  has  discovered  a  few 
errors  of  fact  in  some  of  the  political  passages,  which  future 
lights  may  correct. 

I  owe  you  a  special  apology  for  so  long  failing  to  comply 
with  your  request  on  the  subject  of  autographs.  I  must  do  my- 
self the  justice,  at  the  same  time,  of  saying  that  I  have  never 
entirely  lost  sight  of  it.  But  the  thief,  "procrastination,"  has 
taken  advantage  of  the  clumsiness  of  my  rheumatic  hands,  the 
crowd  of  my  epistolary  files,  and  the  uncertainty  as  to  the  names 
which  you  may  already  possess.  If  you  will  be  so  obliging  as 
to  make  a  note  of  these,  I  will  add  with  real  pleasure  such  of 

vol.  iv.  20 


30G  WORKS   OF   MADISON.  1833. 

those  deemed  worthy  of  selection  as  my  pigeon-holes  will  now 
furnish. 

I  congratulate  you  on  the  effect  of  the  comprising  [compromis- 
ing] anodyne  adopted  by  Congress.  I  hope  it  will  keep  the  patient 
quiet,  notwithstanding  the  renewed  attempts  to  disturb  him,  till 
the  "vis  medicatrix"  of  time  and  a  good  constitution  shall  pro- 
duce a  permanent  state  of  health. 


TO   MAJOR   H.    LEE. 

August  14.  1833. 

Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  June  5th  under  cover  of 
one  to  Mr.  P.  A.  Jay,  of  New  York.  I  find  that  you  have  been 
misled  on  the  subject  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  letter  to  me  of  Decem- 
ber 28,  1794,  by  an  unlucky  misprint  of  Jay  for  Joy,  [G-.  Joy,  in 
London,]  the  writer  of  the  letter  to  which  Mr.  Jefferson  refers. 
This  letter  has  no  reference  to  Mr.  Jay,  nor  to  anything  that 
could  be  within  the  scope  of  your  conjectures. 

My  great  age,  now  considerably  advanced  into  its  83d  year 
with  the  addition  of  much  disease  to  the  usual  infirmities  inci- 
dent to  it,  would  alone  forbid  my  engaging  in  the  heavy  task 
of  correcting  the  "statements  and  inferences"  in  your  "obser- 
vations on  the  writings  of  Mr.  Jefferson."  I  will  not,  however, 
suppress  the  brief  remark,  that  if  you  had  consulted  the  files  of 
your  father,  you  would  have  seen  in  his  correspondence  with 
me  that  he  was  among  the  harshest  censors  of  the  policy  and 
measures  of  the  Federal  Government  during  the  first  term  of 
Washington's  Administration.  You  would  have  seen,  also,  that 
he  patronized  the  Gazette  of  Mr.  Frencau,  and  was  anxious  to 
extend  the  circulation  of  its  strictures  on  the  Administration 
through  another  Gazette.  He  had,  indeed,  a  material  agency 
in  prevailing  on  Freneau,  with  whom  he  had  been,  as  was  the 
case  with  me,  a  College  mate,  to  comply  with  Mr.  Jefferson's 
desire  of  establishing  him  at  the  seat  of  Government. 


1833.  LETTERS.  3Q7 

TO   PETER   AUGUSTUS   JAY. 

Montpellier,  Aug8t  14,  1833. 

Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  8th  instant,  inclosing  one  from  Majoi 
H.  Lee,  has  been  duly  received.  On  recurring  to  the  original 
letter  of  Decr  28,  1794,  from  Mr.  Jefferson  to  me,  it  appears  that 
both  of  you  have  been  misled  on  the  occasion  of  it,  by  an  un- 
lucky misprint  of  Jay  for  Joy,  [G.  Joy,  in  London,]  the  writer 
of  the  letter  to  me,  referred  to  by  Mr.  Jefferson.  This  letter 
has  no  reference  to  your  father,  or  to  any  subject  connected 
with  him  or  with  Major  Lee. 

I  must  ask  the  favor  of  you  to  let  the  inclosed  letter  pass  un- 
der cover  of  your  answer  to  Major  Lee. 


TO    EDWARD    EVERETT. 

August  22d,  1833. 

Dear  Sir. — I  received  in  due  time  the  copy  of  your  address 
at  Worcester  on  the  last  4th  of  July,  and  I  tender  my  thanks 
for  it.  Its  value  is  enhanced  by  the  recurrence  to  remote  events 
interesting  to  the  history  of  our  country.  It  would  be  well  if 
all  our  anniversary  Orators  would  follow  the  example  of  sub- 
stituting for  part  at  least  of  their  eloquent  repetitions,  occur- 
rences now  new  because  they  have  become  old,  and  which  would 
be  acceptable  contributions  to  the  general  reservoir  from  which 
the  historian  must  draw  the  materials  for  his  pen. 


TO   JAMES   B.    LONGACRE. 

August  27,  1833. 
Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  your  letter  of  the  21  instant. 
I  am  aware  of  the  wish  you  naturally  feel  for  such  a  biograph- 
ical sketch  of  me  as  will  preserve  a  uniformity  in  your  Gallery, 
and  I  am  glad  that  you  are  sensible  of  the  control  I  may  feel 
in  supplying  materials  for  it. 

A  friend  will  attempt  a  brief  chronicle  of  my  career,  with, 


308  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

perhaps,  a  few  remarks  and  references,  and  will  forward  the 
paper  when  prepared. 

Mrs.  M.  is  much  gratified  by  f lie  impressions  you  carried 
from  Montpelier,  and  desires  me  to  say  in  reply  to  your  letter 
to  her,  as  I  do  for  myself,  that  a  hospitality  so  well  merited  is 
greatly  overpaid  by  the  terms  in  which  you  speak  of  it. 


TO   W.    A.    DUER. 

SrrTE-vmER,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — T  have  received  your  letter  of  the  28th  ult.,  in- 
closing the  outlines  of  your  work  on  the  Constitutional  Juris- 
prudence of  the  United  States.  The  object  of  the  work  is  cer- 
tainly important  and  well  chosen,  and  the  plan  marked  out  in 
the  analysis  gives  full  scope  for  the  instructive  execution  which 
is  anticipated.  I  am  very  sensible,  sir,  of  the  friendly  respect 
which  suggested  my  name  for  the  distinguished  use  made  of  it> 
and  I  am  not  less  so  of  the  too  partial  terms  which  are  applied 
to  it. 

As  an  attention  to  the  design  of  the  work  is  invited  from  me 
as  "  the  Head  of  the  University  of  Virginia,"  as  well  as  an  in- 
dividual, it  is  proper  for  me  to  observe,  that  T  am  but  the  pre- 
siding member  of  a  Board  of  Visitors;  that  the  superintend" 
ence  of  the  Institution  is  in  the  Faculty  of  Professors,  witli  a 
chairman  annually  appointed  by  the  Visitors;  and  that  the 
choice  of  text  and  class  books  is  left  to  the  Professors  respect- 
ively. The  only  exception  is  in  the  school  of  law,  in  which  the 
subject  of  Government  is  included,  and  on  that  the  Board  of 
Visitors  have  prescribed  as  text  authorities,  "  The  Federalist," 
the  Resolutions  of  Virginia  in  1798,  with  the  comment  on  them 
in  '99,  and  Washington's  Farewell  Address.  The  use.  there- 
fore, that  will  be  made  of  any  analogous  publications  will  depend 
on  the  discretion  of  the  Professor  himself.  His  personal  opin- 
ions, I  believe,  favor  very  strict  rules  of  expounding  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  U.  States. 

I  shall  receive,  sir,  with  thankfulness,  the  promised  volume, 


1833.  LETTERS.  309 

with  the  outlines  of  which  I  have  been  favored;  though  such  is 
the  shattered  state  of  my  health,  added  to  the  83d  year  of  my  age. 
that  I  fear  I  may  be  little  able  to  bestow  on  it  all  the  attention 
I  might  wish,  and  doubt  not  it  will  deserve.  I  can  the  less  cal- 
culate the  degree  in  which  my  views  of  the  Constitution  accord 
with  or  vary  from  yours,  as  I  am  so  imperfectly  acquainted  with 
the  authorities  to  which  I  infer  yours  are  in  the  main  conform- 
able. 

I  had,  as  you  recollect,  an  acquaintance  with  your  father,  to 
which  his  talents  and  social  accomplishments  were  very  attract- 
ive; and  there  was  an  incidental  correspondence  between  us, 
interchanging  information  at  a  critical  moment  when  the  elec- 
tions and  State  conventions  which  were  to  decide  the  fate  of  the 
new  Constitution  were  taking  place.  You  are,  I  presume,  not 
ignorant  that  your  father  was  the  author  of  several  papers  aux- 
iliary to  the  numbers  in  the  "Federalist."  They  appeared,  I 
believe,  in  the  Gazette  of  Mr.  Childs. 


to  w.  c.  RIVES. 

Montpkllier,  October  21,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  favor  of  the  4th  was  duly  received.  I  had 
not  forgotten  the  intention  of  which  I  am  reminded  by  it;  but 
unabated  interruptions,  added  to  my  crippled  health,  have  pro- 
duced a  delay  which  I  could  not  avoid;  and  since  I  have  had 
notice  of  your  return  from  the  Springs  the  same  causes  have 
operated.  I  found  also,  on  the  trial,  more  of  tediousness  in  con. 
suiting  documents  and  noting  references  than  was  anticipated. 
Such  tasks  are  indeed  particularly  tedious  with  my  clumsy  fin- 
gers and  fading  vision.  I  have,  however,  at  length  sketched 
the  paper  now  enclosed.  It  is  not,  as  you  will  observe,  in  a  form 
for  the  press.  I  have  hitherto  thought  it  better,  gross  as  the 
misrepresentations  of  me  have  been,  to  let  them  die  a  natural 
death,  than  to  expose  myself  to  answers  drawn  from  my  age,  or 
to  a  repetition  of  teasing  calls  on  my  personal  knowledge  after 
an  appeal  to  it  myself;  and  apart  from  these,  to  sophistries  and 


310  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

false  statements  forcing  me  into  the  dilemma  of  a  war  with  the 
pen,  for  which  I  am  unfit,  or  a  surrender  of  truth  to  persevering 
assailants.  The  topics  and  authorities  I  have  referred  to  are 
accessible  to  all;  and  through  a  version  of  them  in  the  idiom  of 
another,  some  of  them  might  speak  for  themselves  better,  per- 
haps, than  through  me  as  their  organ. 

We  look  with  equal  confidence  and  pleasure  for  the  promised 
visit  of  Mrs.  Rives  and  yourself,  and  beg  you  both  to  be  assured 
of  our  affectionate  regards. 


October,  1833. 

As  the  charges  of  "  Mutius  "  are  founded,  in  the  main,  on 
"Yates's  Debates  in  the  Federal  Convention  of  1787,"  it  may 
be  remarked,  without  impeaching  the  integrity  of  the  reporter, 
that  he  was  the  representative  in  that  body  of  the  party  in  New 
York  which  was  warmly  opposed  to  the  Convention,  and  to  any 
change  in  the  principles  of  the  "Articles  of  Confederation;" 
that  he  was  doubtless  himself,  at  the  time,  under  all  the  political 
bias  which  an  honest  mind  could  feel;  that  he  left  the  Conven- 
tion, as  the  journals  show,  before  the  middle  of  the  session,  and 
before  the  opinions  or  views  of  the  members  might  have  been 
developed  into  their  precise  and  practical  application;  that  the 
notes  he  took  are,  on  the  face  of  them,  remarkably  crude  and 
desultory,  having  often  the  appearance  of  scraps  and  expres- 
sions, as  the  ear  hastily  caught  them,  with  a  liability  to  omit 
the  sequel  of  an  observation,  or  an  argument  which  might 
qualify  or  explain  it. 

With  respect  to  inferences  from  votes  in  the  journal  of  the 
Convention,  it  may  be  remarked,  that,  being  unaccompanied  by 
the  reasons  for  them,  they  may  often  have  a  meaning  quite  un- 
certain, and  sometimes  contrary  to  the  apparent  one.  A  propo- 
sition may  be  voted  for  with  a  view  to  an  expected  qualification 
of  it,  or  voted  against  as  wrong  in  time  or  place,  or  as  blended 
with  other  matter  of  objectionable  import. 

Although  such  was  the  imperfection  of  Mr.  Yates's  notes  of 


1833.  LETTERS.  ?,\  \ 

what  passed  in  the  Convention,  it  is  on  that  authority  alone 
that  J.  M.  is  charged  with  having  said  "that  the  States  never 
possessed  the  essential  rights  of  sovereignty;  that  these  were 
always  vested  in  Congress." 

II  must  not  be  overlooked,  that  this  language  is  applied  to 
the  condition  of  the  States,  and  to  that  of  Congress,  under  "(he 
Articles  of  Confederation."  Now  can  it  be  believed  that  Mr. 
Yates  did  not  misunderstand  J.  M.  in  making  him  say  "  that 
the  States  had  then  never  possessed  the  essential  rights  of  sover- 
eignty" and  that  "these  had  always  been  vested  in  the  Congress 
then  existing?"  The  charge  is  incredible  when  it  is  recollected 
that  the  second  of  the  Articles  of  Confederation  emphatically 
declares  "  that  each  State  retains  its  sovereignty,  freedom,  and 
independence,  and  every  power,  &c,  which  is  not  expressly 
delegated  to  the  United  States  in  Congress  assembled." 

It  is  quite  possible  that  J.  M.  might  have  remarked  that  cer- 
tain powers,  attributes  of  sovereignty,  had  been  vested  in  Con- 
gress; for  that  was  true  as  to  the  powers  of  war,  peace,  treaties, 
&c.  But  that  he  should  have  held  the  language  ascribed  to  him 
in  the  notes  of  Mr.  Yates  is  so  far  from  being  credible,  that  it 
suggests  a  distrust  of  their  correctness  in  other  cases  where  a 
strong  presumptive  evidence  is  opposed  to  it. 

Again,  J.  M.  is  made  to  say  "that  the  States  were  only  great 
political  corporations,  having  the  power  of  making  by-laws;  and 
thc-e  are  effectual  only  if  they  were  not  contradictory  to  the 
general  confederation." 

Without  admitting  the  correctness  of  this  statement  in  the 
sense  it  seems  meant  to  convey,  it  may  be  observed  that,  accord- 
ing to  the  theory  of  the  old  Confederation,  the  laws  of  the  States 
contradictory  thereto  would  be  ineffectual.  That  they  were  not 
so  in  practice  is  certain;  and  this  practical  inefficacy  is  well 
known  to  have  been  the  primary  inducement  to  the  exchange  of 
the  old  for  the  new  system  of  government  for  the  United  States. 

Another  charge  against  J.  M.  is  an  "  opinion  that  the  States 
ought  to  be  placed  under  the  control  of  the  General  Govern- 
ment, at  least  as  much  as  they  formerly  were  under  the  King 
and  Parliament  of  Great  Britain." 


312  AVORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

The  British  power  over  the  Colonies,  as  admitted  by  tliein, 
consisted  mainly  of— 1.  The  royal  prerogatives  of  war  and 
peace,  treaties,  coinage,  &c,  with  a  veto  on  the  colonial  laws  as 
a  guard  against  laws  interfering  with  the  general  law  and  with 
each  other.  2.  The  parliamentary  power  of  regulating  com- 
merce, as  necessary  to  be  lodged  somewhere,  and  more  conven- 
iently there  than  elsewhere.  These  powers  are  actually  vested 
in  the  Federal  Government,  with  the  difference  that  for  the  veto 
power  is  substituted  the  general  provision  that  the  Constitution 
and  laws  of  the  United  States  shall  be  paramount  to  the  consti- 
tutions and  laws  of  the  States;  and  the  farther  difference,  that 
no  tax  whatever  should  be  levied  by  the  British  Parliament, 
even  as  a  regulation  of  commerce;  whereas,  an  indefinite  power 
of  taxation  is  allowed  to  Congress,  with  the  exception  of  a  tax 
on  exports,  a  tax  the  least  likely  to  be  resorted  to.  When  it  is 
considered  that  the  power  of  taxation  is  the  most  commanding 
of  powers,  the  one  which  Great  Britain  contended  for,  and  the 
Colonies  resisted  by  a  war  of  seven  years;  and  when  it  is  con- 
sidered that  the  British  government  was  in  every  branch  irre- 
sponsible to  the  American  people,  while  every  branch  of  the 
Federal  Government  is  responsible  to  the  States  and  the  people 
as  their  constituents,  it  might  well  occur,  on  a  general  view  of 
the  subject,  that,  in  an  effectual  reform  of  the  federal  system,  as 
much  power  might  be  safely  intrusted  to  the  new  Government 
as  was  allowed  to  Great  Britain  in  the  old  one. 

An  early  idea  taken  up  by  J.  M.,  with  a  view  to  the  security 
of  a  government,  for  the  union  and  harmony  of  the  State  gov- 
ernments, without  allowing  to  the  former  an  unlimited  and  con- 
solidated power,  appears  to  have  been  a  negative  on  the  State 
laws,  to  be  vested  in  the  senatorial  branch  of  the  Government, 
but  under  what  modifications  does  not  appear.  This,  again,  is 
made  a  special  charge  against  him.  That  he  became  sensible 
of  the  obstacles  to  such  an  arrangement,  presented  in  the  extent 
of  the  country,  the  number  of  the  States,  and  the  multiplicity 
of  their  laws,  cannot  be  questioned.  But  is  it  wonderful  that, 
among  the  early  thoughts  on  a  subject  so  complicated  and  full 
of  difficulty,  one  should  have  been  turned  to  a  provision  in  the 


1833.  LETTERS.  313 

compound,  and,  on  this  point,  analogous  system  of  which  this 
counky  had  made  a  part,  substituting  for  the  distant,  the  inde- 
pendent, and  irresponsible  authority  of  a  king,  which  had  ren- 
dered the  provision  justly  odious,  an  elective  and  responsible 
authority  within  ourselves? 

It  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  the  radical  defect  of  the  old  Con 
federation  lay  in  the  power  of  the  States  to  comply  with,  to  dis 
regard,  or  to  counteract  the  authorized  requisitions  and  regula- 
tions of  Congress;  that  a  radical  cure  for  this  fatal  defect  was 
the  essential  object  for  which  the  reform  was  instituted;  that 
all  the  friends  of  the  reform  looked  for  such  a  cure;  that  there 
could,  therefore,  be  no  question  but  as  to  the  mode  of  effecting 
it.  The  Deputies  of  Virginia  to  the  Convention,  consisting  of 
George  Washington,  Governor  Randolph,  &c,  appear  to  have 
proposed  a  power  in  Congress  to  repeal  the  unconstitutional  and 
interfering  laws  of  the  States.  The  proposed  negative  on  them, 
as  the  Journals  show,  produced  an  equal  division  of  the  votes. 
In  every  proceeding  of  the  Convention  where  the  question  of 
paramountship  in  the  Union  could  be  involved,  the  necessity  of 
it  appears  to  have  been  taken  for  granted.  The  mode  of  con- 
trolling the  legislation  of  the  States,  which  was  finally  preferred, 
has  been  already  noticed.  Whether  it  be  the  best  mode  expe- 
rience is  to  decide.  But  the  necessity  of  some  adequate  mode 
of  preventing  the  States,  in  their  individual  characters,  from 
defeating  the  constitutional  authority  of  the  States  in  their  uni- 
ted character,  and  from  collisions  among  themselves,  had  been 
decided  by  a  past  experience.  [It  may  be  thought  not  unworthy 
of  notice  that  Col.  Taylor  regarded  the  control  of  the  Federal 
Judiciary  over  the  State  laws  as  more  objectionable  than  a  legis- 
lative negative  on  them.  See  New  Views,  &c,  p.  18;  contra, 
see  Mr.  Jefferson,  vol.  ii,  p.  163.] 

Matins  asks,  "If  the  States  possessed  no  sovereignty,  how 
could  J.  M.  demonstrate  that  the  States  retained  a  residuary 
sovereignty,  and  call  for  a  solution  of  the  problem?"  He  will 
himself  solve  it  by  answering  the  question,  which  is  most 
to  be  believed,  that  J.  M.  should  have  been  guilty  of  such  an 


314  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

absurdity,  or  that  Mr.  Yates  should  have  erred  in  ascribing  it 
to  him  ?  ' 

Mr.  Yates  himself  says  that  J.  M.  expressed  as  much  attach- 
ment to  the  rights  of  the  States  as  to  the  trial  by  jury. 

By  associating  J.  M.  with  Mr.  Hamilton,  who  entertained  pe- 
culiar opinions,  Mutius  would  fain  infer  that  J.  M.  concurred 
with  those  opinions.  The  inference  would  have  been  as  good 
if  he  bad  made  Mr.  Hamilton  concur  in  all  the  opinions  of  J.  M. 
That  they  agreed,  to  a  certain  extent,  as  the  body  of  the  Con- 
vention manifestly  did,  in  the  expediency  of  an  energetic  Gov- 
ernment adequate  to  the  exigencies  of  the  Union,  is  true.  But 
when  Mutius  adds,  "  that  Mr.  Hamilton  and  Mr.  Madison  advo- 
cated a  system  not  only  independent  of  the  States,  but  which 
would  have  reduced  them  to  the  meanest  municipalities,"  he 
failed  to  consult  the  recorded  differences  of  opinion  between 
the  two  individuals. 

Mutius,  in  his  anxiety  to  discredit  the  opinions  of  J.  M.,  en- 
deavours to  discredit  the  "  Federalist,"  in  which  he  bore  a  part, 
by  observing,  "  that  the  work  was  no  favourite  with  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son." Mutius  is  probably  ignorant  of,  and  will  be  best  answered 
by,  the  fact  that  Mr.  Jefferson  proposed,  that,  with  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence,  the  Valedictory  of  General  Washington, 
and  the  Resolutions  and  Report  of  1798-99,  the  Federalist 
should  be,  as  it  now  is,  a  text-book  in  the  University.  He  de- 
scribes it  as  "being  an  authority  to  which  appeal  is  habitually 
made  by  all,  and  rarely  declined  or  denied  by  any,  as  evidence 
of  the  general  opinion  of  those  who  framed  and  of  those  who  ac- 
cepted the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  on  questions  as  to 
its  general  meaning."  See  in  vol.  ii,  p.  382.  [He*  speaks  of 
the  Federalist  "  as  being,  in  his  opinion,  the  best  commentary 
on  the  principles  of  Government  that  ever  was  written.  In 
some  parts,  it  is  discoverable  that  the  author  meant  only  to  say 
what  may  bo  best  said  in  defence  of  opinions  in  which  he  did 
not  concur.     But,  in  general,  it  establishes  firmly  the  plan  of 

*  This  in  brackets  omitted  in  the  letter. 


1833.  LETTERS.  3^5 

Government.  I  confess  it  lias  rectified  me  on  several  points. 
As  to  the  Bill  of  Rights,  however,  I  think  it  should  still  be 
added."  This  was  materially  affected  by  the  amendments  to  the 
Constitution.] 

Mutius  finds  another  charge  against  J.  M.  of  inconsistency 
between  the  report  of  1799  and  his  letter  to  Mr.  Everett  in 
1,830;  a  charge  which  he  endeavours  to  support  by  a  compari- 
son of  the  following  extracts  from  the  documents,  but  which  is 
deprived  of  all  its  force,  or  rather  is  turned  against  him  by  the 
plain  distinction  between  the  "  last  resort  "  within  the  forms  of 
the  Constitution  and  the  ulterior  resort  to  the  authority  which 
is  paramount  to  the  Constitution  itself.* 

Extract  from  the  Report  of  1799,  1800. 

"However  true  it  may  be  that  the  Judicial  department  is,  in 
all  questions  submitted  to  it  by  the  forms  of  the  Constitution, 
to  decide  in  the  last  resort,  this  resort  must  necessarily  be 
deemed  the  last  in  relation  to  the  authorities  of  the  other  de- 
partments of  the  Government,  not  in  relation  to  the  rights  of 
the  parties  to  the  constitutional  compact,  for  which  the  judicial 
as  well  as  the  other  departments  hold  their  delegated  trusts. 
On  any  other  hypothesis  the  delegation  of  judicial  power  would 
annul  the  authority  delegating  it;  and  the  concurrence  of  this 
department  with  the  others  in  usurped  powers  might  subvert 
forever,  and  beyond  the  possible  reach  of  any  rightful  remedy, 
the  very  Constitution  which  all  were  instituted  to  preserve. 

"  It  appears  to  your  committee  to  be  a  plain  principle,  founded 
in  common  sense,  illustrated  by  common  practice,  and  essential 
to  the  nature  of  compacts,  that  when  resort  can  be  had  to  no 
tribunal  superior  to  the  authority  of  the  parties,  the  parties  them- 
selves must  be  the  rightful  judges  in  the  last  resort,  whether  the 
bargain  made  has  been  pursued  or  violated.  The  States  being 
the  parties  to  the  constitutional  compact,  and  in  their  sovereign 
capacity,  it  follows,  of  necessity,  that  there  can  be  no  tribunal 
above  their  authority  to  decide  in  the  last  resort  whether  the  com 

*  For  the  extracts  see  the  Richmond  Whig,  September  17,  1833. 


3X6  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

pact  madeby  them  be  violated;  and,  consequently,  that  as  the  par- 
ties to  it  they  must  themselves  decide,  in  the  last  resort,  such 
questions  as  may  he  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  require  their  in- 
terposition. 

"  If  the  deliberate  exercise  of  dangerous  powers,  palpably 
withheld  by  the  Constitution,  could  not  justify  the  parties  to  it 
in  interposing  even  so  far  as  to  arrest  the  progress  of  the  evil, 
and  thereby  to  preserve  the  Constitution  itself,  as  well  as  to  pro- 
vide for  the  safety  of  the  parties  to  it,  there  would  be  an  end  to 
all  relief  from  usurped  power,  and  a  direct  subversion  of  the 
rights  specified  or  recognised  under  all  the  State  constitutions, 
as  well  as  a  plain  denial  of  the  fundamental  principle  on  which 
our  independence  was  declared. 

"The  authority  of  constitutions  over  governments,  and  of  the 
sovereignty  of  the  people  over  constitutions,  are  truths  which  are 
at  all  times  necessary  to  be  kept  in  mind,  and  at  no  time,  per- 
haps, more  necessary  than  at  the  present." 

Extracts  from  Mr.  Madison's  letter  to  the  Editor  of  the  North 
American  Review,  dated  August,  1830.* 

"  It  is  true  that,  in  controversies  relating  to  the  boundary 
between  the  two  jurisdictions,  the  tribunal  which  is  ultimately 
to  decide  is  to  be  established  under  the  General  Government.  But 
this  does  not  change  the  principle  of  the  case.  The  decision  is  to 
be  impartially  made,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  Constitution, 
and  all  the  usual  and  most  eifectual  precautions  are  taken  to 
secure  this  impartiality.  Some  such  tribunal  is  clearly  essential 
to  prevent  an  appeal  to  the  sword  and  a  dissolution  of  the  com- 
pact, and  that  it  ought  to  be  established  under  the  general 
rather  than  under  the  local  governments;  or,  to  speak  more 
properly,  that  it  could  be  safely  established  under  the  first 
alone,  is  a  position  not  likely  to  be  combated."  Having  quoted 
the  above  from  the  Federalist,!  Mr.  Madison  proceeded  and  re- 
marked, "that  the  Constitution  is  a  compact;  that  its  text  is  to 
be  expounded  according  to  the  provisions  for  exjjounding  it, 

*  Ante,  p.  95  t  Number  39. 


1833.  LETTERS. 


117 


making  a  part  of  the  compact;  and  that  none  of  tlie  parties  can 
rightfully  renounce  the  expounding  provision  more  than  any  other 
part.  When  such  a  right  accrues,  as  it  may  accrue,  it  must 
grow  out  of  the  abuses  of  the  compact,  releasing  the  sufferers 
from  their  fealty  to  it." 

"In  the  event  of  a  failure  of  every  constitutional  resort,  and 
an  accumulation  of  usurpations  and  abuses  rendering  passive 
obedience  and  non-resistence  a  greater  evil  than  resistence  and 
revolution,  there  can  be  but  one  resort,  the  last  of  all,  an  appeal 
from  the  cancelled  obligations  of  the  constitutional  compact  to 
original  rights  and  the  law  of  self-preservation.  This  is  the 
■ultima  ratio  under  all  governments." 

The  positions  in  the  report  are,  that  although  the  Judiciary 
department  is,  in  all  questions  submitted  to  it  by  the  forms  of 
the  Constitution,  to  decide  in  the  last  resort,  the  resort  is  not 
the  last  in  relation  to  the  rights  of  the  parties  to  the  constitu- 
tional compact;  that  these,  from  whom  the  judicial  as  well  as 
the  other  departments  hold  their  delegated  trust,  are  the  right- 
ful judges  in  the  last  resort,  whether  the  compact  has  been  pur- 
sued or  violated.  [This  view  of  the  subject  appears,  from  the 
report  itself,  to  have  been  specially  called  for  by  the  extravagant 
claims  in  behalf  of  judicial  decisions  as  precluding  any  interpo- 
sition whatever  on  the  part  of  the  States.] 

In  the  letter  to  Mr.  Everett,  the  positions  are,  as  cited  from 
the  "  Federalist,"  that,  "  in  controversies  relating  to  the  bound- 
aries between  the  two  jurisdictions,"  [the  Federal  and  the 
State,]  "  the  tribunal  which  is  ultimately  to  decide  is  to  be  es- 
tablished under  the  General  Government;  that  the  decision  is 
to  be  impartially  made,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  Constitu- 
tion; that  some  such  tribunal  was  essential,  to  prevent  an  appeal 
to  the  sword  and  a  dissolution  of  the  Union;  and  that  it  ouo-lit 
to  be  established  under  the  general  rather  than  under  the  local 
governments;  or,  to  speak  more  properly,  that  it  could  be  safely 
established  under  the  first  alone,  is  a  position  not  likely  to  be 
combated." 

It  is  sufficiently  clear  that  the  ultimate  decision  of  the  tribunal 
here  referred  to  is  confined  to  cases  within  the  judicial  scope  of 


318  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

tlic  Government;  that  it  had  reference  to  interfering  decisions 
of  a  local  or  State  authority;  and  that  it  neither  denies  nor  ex- 
cludes a  resort  to  the  authority  of  the  parties  to  the  Constitu 
tion,  an  authority  above  that  of  the  Constitution  itself. 

That  the  letter  to  Mr.  Everett  understood  the  term  ultimately, 
as  applied  to  the  decisions  of  the  Federal  tribunal,  to  be  of  a 
limited  scope,  is  shown  by  the  paragraph  omitted  by  Mutius. 
"Should  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  as  here  reviewed'' 
[including  the  judiciary]  "  be  found  not  to  secure  the  govern- 
ments and  rights  of  the  States  against  usurpations  and  abuses 
on  the  part  of  the  United  States,  the  final  resort  within  the  pur- 
view of  the  Constitution  lies  in  an  amendment  of  the  Constitu- 
tion according  to  a  process  applicable  by  the  States."  [Here 
is  a  special  resort  provided  by  the  Constitution,  which  is  uLte- 
rior  to  the  judicial  authority;  the  authority  of  three-fourths  of 
the  States  being  made  equivalent,  with  two  specified  excep- 
tions, to  the  entire  authorities  of  the  parties  to  the  Constitu- 
tion.] 

And  that  the  ultimate  decision  of  the  judicial  authority  could 
not  be  meant,  in  the  letter  to  Mr.  Everett,  to  be  the  last  of  all, 
is  shown  by  the  paragraph  not  omitted  by  Mutius.  "And  in 
the  event  of  a  failure  of  every  constitutional  resort,  and  an  ac- 
cumulation of  usurpations  and  abuses  rendering  passive  obedi- 
ence and  non-resistence  a  greater  evil  than  resistence  and  revo- 
lution, there  can  remain  but  one  resort,  the  last  of  all,  an  appeal 
from  the  cancelled  obligations  of  the  constitutional  compact  to 
original  rights  and  the  law  of  self-preservation.  This  is  the 
ultima  ratio  under  all  governments." 

Instead  of  the  paragraph  omitted  by  Mutius,  he  has  inserted 
from  the  letter  a  remark,  "  that  the  Constitution  is  a  compact; 
that  its  text  is  to  be  expounded  according  to  the  provisions  for 
expounding  it,  making  a  part  of  the  compact;  and  that  none  of 
the  parties  can  rightfully  renounce  the  expounding  provision 
more  than  any  other  part.  When  such  a  right  accrues,  as  it 
may  accrue,  it  must  grow  out  of  the  abuses  of  the  compact  re- 
leasing the  sufferers  from  their  fealty  to  it."  What  is  this  but 
saying  that  the  compact  is  binding  in  all  its  parts  on  those  who 


1833.  LETTERS.  3I9 

made  it?  that  the  acts  of  the  authorities  constituted  by  it  must 
be  observed  by  the  parties  till  the  compact  be  changed  or  abol- 
ished? Is  not  this  true  of  all  compacts,  and  the  dictate  of  com- 
mon sense  as  well  as  universal  practice? 

Where,  now,  is  the  inconsistency  between  the  report  of  1700 
and  the  letter  to  Mr.  Everett?  They  both  recognise  and  ad- 
here to  the  distinction  between  a  last  resort  in  behalf  of  consti- 
tutional rights,  within  the  forms  of  the  Constitution,  and  the 
ulterior  resorts  to  the  authority  paramount  to  the  Constitution. 

These  different  resorts,  instead  of  being  incompatible,  neces- 
sarily result  from  the  principles  of  all  free  Governments, 
whether  of  a  Federal  or  other  character.  Is  not  the  expound- 
ing authority,  wherever  lodged  by  the  constitution  of  Virginia, 
the  last  resort  within  the  purview  of  the  Constitution  against 
violations  of  it?  and  are  not  the  people  who  made  the  Consti- 
tution a  last  resort  against  violations  of  it,  even  when  commit- 
ted by  the  last  resort  within  the  constitutional  provisions?  The 
people  as  composing  a  State,  and  the  States  as  composing  the 
Union,  may,  in  fact,  interpose  either  as  constituents  of  their  re- 
spective governments,  according  to  the  forms  of  their  respective 
constitutions,  or  as  the  creators  of  their  constitutions,  and  as 
paramount  to  them  as  well  as  to  the  governments. 

It  cannot,  as  is  believed,  be  shown  that  J.  M.  ever  admitted 
that  a  single  State  had  a  constitutional  right  to  annul,  resist,  or 
control  a  law  of  the  United  States,  or  that  he  ever  denied  either 
the  right  of  the  States  as  parties  to  the  Constitution  [not  a 
single  State  or  party]  to  interpose  against  usurped  power;  or 
the  right  of  a  single  State,  as  a  natural  right,  to  shake  off  a  yoke 
too  oppressive  to  be  borne.  These  distinctions  are  clear,  and, 
if  kept  in  view,  would  dispel  the  verbal  and  sophistical  confu- 
sion so  apt  to  bewilder  the  weak  and  to  disgust  the  wise. 

It  has  been  a  charge  against  J.  M.  that,  in  his  letter  to  Mr. 
Everett,  he  represents  the  people  of  the  several  States  as  consti- 
tuting themselves  one  people  for  certain  purposes. 

That  the  authority  of  the  people  of  the  States,  which,  exer- 
cised as  it  was  in  their  highest  sovereign  capacity  in  each,  could 
have  made  them,  if  they  had  so  pleased,  one  people  for  all  pur- 


320  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

poses,  was  sufficient  to  make  tlicm  one  people  for  certain  pur- 
poses, cannot  be  denied;  and  that  they  did  make  themselves  one 
people  for  certain  purposes,  results  from  the  nature  of  the  Con- 
stitution formed  by  them,  which,  like  the  Slate  constitutions- 
presents  a  Government  organized  into  the  regular  departments 
of  legislative,  executive,  and  judiciary,  and,  like  the  State  gov- 
ernments, operating  immediately  and  individually  on  the  people, 
by  the  same  coercive  forms  and  means. 

The  oneness,  the  sovereignty,  and  the  nationality  of  the  people 
of  the  United  States,  within  the  prescribed  limits,  has  hitherto 
been  the  language  of  all  parties;  and  of  no  one  of  the  Republi- 
can party  more  expressly  than  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  whose  opinions 
have  been  so  often  misunderstood  and  misapplied.  Take  some 
of  the  extracts  which  his  printed  writings  furnish.  In  a  letter 
to  J.  M.,  vol.  ii,  p.  442,  he  says:  "This  instrument  [the  Fed, 
eral  Constitution]  forms  us  into  one  State,  as  to  certain  objects, 
and  gives  us  a  legislative  and  executive  body  for  those  objects." 
He  elsewhere  uses  the  expression,  "to  make  us  one  as  to  others, 
but  several  as  to  ourselves."  In  his  letter  to  Destutt  Tracy,  he 
applies  the  term  amalgamated  to  the  union  of  the  States;  and 
in  one  to  Mr.  Hopkinson,  the  term  consolidated  to  the  Govern- 
ment. These  terms  are  doubtless  to  be  taken  with  the  proper 
qualifications;  but  surely  they  would  not  have  been  applied  to 
a  constitution  purely  and  exclusively  federal  in  its  character. 

In  a  letter  to  Mr.  Wythe,  vol.  ii,  p.  230,  he  says:  "  My  own 
general  idea  was,  that  the  States  should  severally  preserve  their 
sovereignty,  and  that  the  exercise  of  the  federal  sovereignty 
should  be  divided  among  the  three  several  bodies,  legislative, 
executive,  and  judiciary,  as  the  State  sovereignties  are:  and  that 
some  peaceable  means  should  be  contrived  for  the  federal  head 
to  force  compliance  on  the  part  of  the  States."  [Having  refer- 
ence, it  may  be  presumed,  to  an  obstruction  of  their  trade,  re- 
peatedly suggested  in  his  correspondence  with  his  friends  as 
applicable  even  to  the  "Articles  of  Confederation,'' or  to  the 
operation  of  the  laws  on  the  people,  as  in  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  which  was  then  before  him.] 

In  a  letter  to  J.  M.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  64,  alluding  to  the  expected 


1833.  LETTERS.  30^ 

Convention  of  1787,  liis  language  is,  "  to  make  us  one  nation  as 
to  foreign  concerns,  and  keep  us  distinct  as  to  domestic  ones, 
gives  the  outline  of  the  proper  division  of  power  between  the 
general  and  particular  governments." 

To  question  the  nationality  of  the  States  in  their  united  char- 
acter has  a  strange  appearance,  when  in  that  character  only 
they  arc  known  to  and  acknowleged  by  other  nations;  in  that 
only  can  make  war,  peace,  and  treaties;  and  in  that  only  can  en- 
tertain the  diplomatic  and  all  the  other  international  relations 
which  appertain  to  the  national  character. 

With  all  this  evidence  at  hand,  what  ought  to  be  the  designa- 
tion of  those  who,  renouncing  the  views  and  language  which 
have  been  applied  by  the  Republican  party  to  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  are  now  charging,  in  the  name  of  republi- 
canism, those  who  remain  steadfast  to  their  creed,  with  innova- 
tion, inconsistency,  heresy,  and  apostasy  ?  Such  an  outrage  on 
truth,  on  justice,  and  even  on  common  decorum,  must  be  of  short 
endurance.  The  illusion  under  which  it  is  propagated  is  the 
misapplication  to  a  peculiar  and  complex  modification  of  polit- 
ical power,  views  of  it  applicable  only  to  ordinary  and  simple 
forms  of  Government.  Happily,  appeals  can  be  always  trium- 
phantly made  from  such  perversions  to  the  nature  and  text  of 
the  Constitution  and  the  facts  inseparable  from  it. 

Returning  to  the  special  charge  of  inconsistency  against  J. 
M.,  it  is  not  more  than  justice  to  him  to  say,  that  it  will  be  dif- 
ficult to  find  among  our  public  men,  who  have  passed  through 
the  same  changes  of  circumstances  and  vicissitudes  of  parties, 
one  who  has  been  more  uniform  in  his  opinions  on  the  great 
constitutional  questions  which  have  agitated  the  country.  To 
the  constitutionality  of  the  bank,  originally  opposed  by  him,  he 
acceded;  but,  as  appears  by  his  letter  to  Mr.  Ingersoll.  on  the 
ground  of  the  authoritative  and  multiplied  sanctions  given  to 
it,  amounting,  he  conceived,  to  an  evidence  of  the  judgment  and 
will  of  the  nation;  and  on  the  ground  of  a  consistency  of  this 
change  of  opinion  with  his  unchanged  opinion,  that  such  a  sanc- 
tion ought  to  overrule  the  abstract  and  private  opinions  of 
individuals. 

vol.  iv.  21 


322  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

With  the  exception  of  the  case  of  the  bank  thus  explained,  lie 
has  preserved  a  uniform  consistency  on  the  great  constitutional 
questions,  the  caption,  "  We,  the  people;  "  the  phrase  "  common 
defence  and  general  welfare;  "  "  roads  and  canals;  "  the  "  alien 
and  sedition  laws."  It  might  not  improperly  be  added,  that  he 
appears  to  have  originated  and  perseveringly  supported  the 
amendments  to  the  Constitution  adopted  at  the  first  session  of 
the  first  Congress,  as  guards  against  constructive  enlargements 
of  the  Federal  powers.  And  it  nowhere  appears  that  he  has 
ever  changed  his  opinions  with  regard  to  them. 

If  he  advocates  the  constitutionality  of  a  tariff  for  the  encour- 
agement of  domestic  manufactures,  it  must  be  admitted  that  it 
is  in  conformity  with  his  course  on  that  subject  at,  and  ever 
since,  the  first  Congress  under  the  present  Constitution  of  the 
United  States;  that  in  this  opinion  he  has  had  the  concurrence 
of  Washington  and  all  his  successors,  and  especially  of  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson. In  the  same  opinion  he  has  been  supported  by  that  of 
every  Congress,  from  the  first  to  the  last.*  It  may  not  be  im- 
proper to  remark,  that  while  he  maintains  the  constitutionality 
of  a  protective  tariff,  he  is  a  friend  to  the  theory  of  free  trade, 
and  in  favour  of  such  exceptions  only  as  are  consistent  with  its 
principle,  and  as  are  dictated  either  by  a  regard  to  the  public 
safety  or  by  a  fair  calculation  that  a  temporary  sacrifice  of 
cheapness  will  be  followed  by  a  greater  cheapness,  permanent 
as  well  as  independent. t 

If  he  considers  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  in  cases  within  its  constitutional  jurisdiction,  as  para- 
mount to  State  decisions,  it  is  not  the  effect  of  change  in  his 
opinion;  for  the  same  appears  in  his  original  exposition  and  vin- 
dication of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  In  his  letter 
to  Mr.  Everett  he  maintains  (does  he  not  prove?)  that  the  con- 
trolling authority  of  the  Federal  Judiciary  is  the  only  defence 
against  nullifying  acts  of  a  State  through  its  judiciary  organ. 
It  will  be  as  difficult  for  those  who  deny  the  nullifying  power 


*  See  appendix  to  Mr.  Cabell's  printed  speech  in  pamphlet  form, 
f  See  his  letters  to  Mr.  Cabell. 


1833.  LETTERS.  303 

of  a  State  to  deny  this  inference,  as  for  those  who  assert  the 
doctrine  to  reconcile  it  with  the  text  and  principles  of  the  Con- 
stitution or  with  the  existence  of  the  Union. 

Mutius  is  probably  a  young  num.  He  certainly  possesses 
talents  worthy  of  literary  cultivation.  When  he  shall  mingle 
with  political  zeal  a  due  portion  of  the  candour  which  it  is 
hoped  belongs  to  his  nature,  it  may  safely  be  left  to  his  own 
judgment  to  decide  whether  the  scanty  and  hasty  notes  of  Mr. 
Yates,  or  inferences  from  naked  votes  in  the  Journal  of  the  Con- 
vention, ought  to  outweigh,  in  a  charge  of  inconsistency  against 
J.  M.,  the  authority  of  his  earliest  writings  on  the  subject  of 
the  Constitution,  his  language  in  the  Convention  of  Virginia 
when  the  Constitution  was  under  discussion,  and  the  whole 
course  of  his  opinions,  official  and  unofficial,  down  to  the  latest 
date. 

With  the  advantage  of  a  cooler  temper  and  maturer  reflec- 
tion, he  will  be  a  better  judge  also  of  his  own  consistency,  in 
his  eager  efforts  to  discredit  that  of  J.  M.,  while  his  eulogies 
and  confidence  are  lavished  on  others  who  have  passed  abruptly 
from  one  extreme  to  its  opposite,  on  subjects  vital  to  the  Con- 
stitution, the  Union,  and  the  happiness  of  our  country. 


TO    FRANCIS   PAGE. 

Montpellier,  Nov  7th,  1833. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  inclosing  a  printed  copy 
of  a  petition  to  the  General  Assembly  in  behalf  of  the  heirs  and 
representatives  of  General  Nelson,  and  requesting  any  informa- 
tion I  may  be  able  to  give  respecting  Ins  advances  and  engage- 
ments for  the  public  service  at  a  trying  period  of  the  Revolu- 
tionary war  in  Virginia. 

I  regret  that  my  absence  from  the  State  during  his  meritori- 
ous services  as  a  military  commander  and  Governor,  deprived 
me  of  the  opportunity  of  having  any  personal  knowledge  of 
them.  But  my  general  acquaintance  with  his  character,  and  the 
impressions  left  by  whatever  was  of  public  notoriety,  make  me 


324  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

readily  confide  in  the  statements  of  the  petition  and  inspire  a 
sincere  wish  that  it  may  be  favorably  received. 

My  personal  acquaintance  with  General  Nelson  was  limited 
to  a  few  opportunities  at  an  early  stage  of  the  Revolution.  But 
it  was  sufficient,  however,  to  disclose  to  me  his  distinguished 
worth.  He  was  excelled  by  no  man  in  the  generosity  of  his 
nature,  in  the  nobleness  of  his  sentiments,  in  the  purity  of  his 
Revolutionary  principles,  and  in  an  exalted  patriotism  that  en- 
sured every  service  and  sacrifice  that  his  country  might  need. 

With  this  view  of  the  subject,  it  could  not  but  accord  with 
my  best  sympathies  that  nothing  which  may  be  due  to  the  ances- 
tor may  be  withheld  from  the  heirs  to  them.  I  must  be  allowed 
to  add,  that  the  gratification  will  be  increased  by  the  knowledge 
that  the  benefit  will  be  shared  by  descendants  of  Governor 
Page,  whose  memory  will  always  be  classed  witli  that  of  the 
most  distinguished  patriots  of  the  Revolution.  Nor  was  he  less 
endeared  to  his  friends,  among  whom  I  had  an  intimate  place, 
by  the  interesting  accomplishments  of  his  mind  and  the  warmth 
of  his  social  affections,  than  he  was  to  his  country,  by  the  evi- 
dence he  gave  of  devotion  to  the  republicanism  of  its  institu- 
tions. 


TO   MAJOR   H.   LEE. 

Montpellier,  Nov  26,  1833. 

I  received,  sir,  on  the  9th  instant  your  letter  of  Sept'  15,  and 
inclose  copies  of  such  of  your  father's  letters  to  me  as  are  em- 
braced by  your  request.  They  are  entire,  with  the  exception 
of  one,  from  which  the  conclusion  had  been  cut  off  for  an  auto- 
graphic collection. 

Finding  that  my  files  do  not  contain  copies  of  my  letters  to 
your  father,  as  is  the  case  with  his  files  and  his  letters  to  me,  I 
must  ask  the  favor  of  you  to  supply  the  omission  as  far,  at  least, 
as  relates  to  the  period  of  those  herewith  forwarded. 

I  thank  you  for  your  friendly  wishes  on  the  subject  of  my 
health.     The  most  that  can  be  expected  is,  that  it  will  not  de- 


1833.  LETTERS.  325 

crease  beyond  the  increase  of  my  years.  The  two  causes  taken 
together  produce  a  state  of  feebleness  and  emaciation  more  than 
justifying  me  in  declining  the  task  to  which  you  invited  me.  It 
may  be  hoped  that  truth  enough  will  escape  oblivion  for  future 
justice  to  all  parties. 


TO   G.    W.    FEATHERSTONHAUGH. 

Montpelliee,  Dec  8,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  just  received  yours  of  the  6th.  I  am 
glad  to  find  the  public  attention  in  Virginia  at  length  turning 
towards  the  mineral  resources  of  'the  State,  and  that  you  are 
promoting  it  by  the  communications  which  your  science  and 
observations  enable  you  to  make.  A  geological  survey,  skil- 
fully conducted,  seems  to  be  the  most  obvious  and  effectual 
preparation  for  the  discoveries  in  view,  as  well  in  relation  to 
public  utility  and  wealth  as  to  a  branch  of  knowledge  becoming 
every  day  more  and  more  curious  and  interesting.  With  such 
impressions  I  may  readily  be  supposed  to  wish  success  to  all  the 
means  that  may  be  employed  in  so  meritorious  a  work. 


TO   FREDERICK   PEYSTER. 

DR  Sir, — I  received  by  the  last  mail  your  letter  of  July 
19th.  The  volumes  containing  "The  published  collections  of 
the  New  York  Historical  Society,"  to  which  it  refers,  arrived 
a  few  days  ago.  I  beg  you,  sir,  to  tender  to  the  Society  my 
grateful  acknowledgments  for  so  valuable  a  testimony  of  their 
regard.  I  sincerely  wish  it  every  success  in  its  laudable  under- 
taking, and  that  its  example  may  be  followed  in  all  the  States 
composing  our  Union.  Such  Institutions  will  afford  the  best 
aids  in  procuring,  and  preserving,  the  materials  otherwise  but 
too  perishable,  from  which  a  faithful  history  of  our  country 
must  be  formed — a  history  which,  if  well  executed,  will  be  su- 
perior to  the  most  distinguished,  in  the  authenticity  of  its  facts, 


326  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

and  inferior  to  none  in  the  lessons  which  it  is  the  province  of 
the  Historian  to  convey  to  posterity. 

I  thank  you,  sir,  for  the  friendly  sentiments  which  your  letter 
expresses,  and  beg  you  to  accept  assurances  of  my  esteem  and 
my  respectful  salutations. 


to . 

1833. 

[Majority  Governments.'] 

Dear  Sir, — You  justly  take  alarm  at  the  new  doctrine  that 
a  majority  government  is  of  all  other  governments  the  most  op- 
pressive. The  doctrine  strikes  at  the  root  of  republicanism, 
and,  if  pursued  into  its  consequences,  must  terminate  in  abso- 
lute monarchy,  with  a  standing  military  force;  such  alone  being 
impartial  between  its  subjects,  and  alone  capable  of  overpower- 
ing majorities  as  well  as  minorities. 

But  it  is  said  that  a  majority  government  is  dangerous  only 
where  there  is  a  difference  in  the  interest  of  the  classes  or  sec- 
tions composing  the  community;  that  this  difference  will  gen- 
erally be  greatest  in  communities  of  the  greatest  extent;  and 
that  such  is  the  extent  of  the  United  States  and  the  discordance 
of  interests  in  them,  that  a  majority  cannot  be  trusted  with 
power  over  a  minority. 

Formerly,  the  opinion  prevailed  that  a  republican  govern- 
ment was  in  its  nature  limited  to  a  small  sphere;  and  was  in  its 
true  character  only  when  the  sphere  was  so  small  that  the  peo- 
ple could,  in  a  body,  exercise  the  government  over  themselves. 

The  history  of  the  ancient  republics,  and  those  of  a  more 
modern  date,  had  demonstrated  the  evils  incident  to  popular 
assemblages,  so  quickly  formed,  so  susceptible  of  contagious 
passions,  so  exposed  to  the  misguidance  of  eloquent  and  ambi- 
tious leaders,  and  so  apt  to  be  tempted  by  the  facility  of  form- 
ing interested  majorities,  into  measures  unjust  and  oppressive 
to  the  minor  parties. 

The  introduction  of  the  representative  principle  into  modern 


1833.  LETTERS.  327 

governments,  particularly  of  Great  Britain  and  her  colonial 
offsprings,  had  shown  the  practicability  of  popular  governments 
in  a  larger  sphere,  and  that  the  enlargement  of  the  sphere  was 
a  cure  for  many  of  the  evils  inseparable  from  the  popular  forms 
in  small  communities. 

It  remained  for  the  people  of  the  United  States,  by  combining 
a  federal  with  a  republican  organization,  to  enlarge  still  more 
the  sphere  of  representative  government,  and,  by  convenient 
partitions  and  distributions  of  power,  to  provide  the  better  for 
internal  justice  and  order,  while  it  afforded  the  best  protection 
against  external  dangers. 

Experience  and  reflection  may  be  said  not  only  to  have  ex- 
ploded the  old  error,  that  republican  governments  could  only 
exist  within  a  small  compass,  but  to  have  established  the  im- 
portant truth,  that,  as  representative  governments  are  necessary 
substitutes  for  popular  assemblages,  so  an  association  of  free 
communities,  each  possessing  a  responsible  government  under  a 
collective  authority  also  responsible,  by  enlarging  the  practica- 
ble sphere  of  popular  governments,  promises  a  consummation  of 
all  the  reasonable  hopes  of  the  patrons  of  free  government. 

It  was  long  since  observed  by  Montesquieu,  has  been  often 
repeated  since,  and,  may  it  not  be  added,  illustrated  within  the 
United  States,  that  in  a  confederal  system,  if  one  of  its  members 
happens  to  stray  into  pernicious  measures,  it  will  be  reclaimed 
by  the  frowns  and  the  good  examples  of  the  others,  before  the 
evil  example  will  have  infected  the  others. 

But  whatever  opinions  may  be  formed  on  the  general  subjects 
of  confederal  systems,  or  the  interpretation  of  our  own,  every 
friend  to  republican  government  ought  to  raise  his  voice  against 
the  sweeping  denunciation  of  majority  governments  as  the  most 
tyrannical  and  intolerable  of  all  governments. 

The  patrons  of  this  new  heresy  will  attempt  in  vain  to  mask 
its  anti-republicanism  under  a  contrast  between  the  extent  and 
the  discordant  interests  of  the  Union,  and  the  limited  dimen- 
sions and  sameness  of  interests  within  its  members.  Passing 
by  the  great  extent  of  some  of  the  States,  and  the  fact  that  these 
cannot  be  charged  with  more  unjust  and  oppressive  majorities 


328  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

than  the  smaller  States,  it  may  be  observed  that  the  extent  of  the 
Union,  divided  as  the  powers  of  government  are  between  it  and 
its  members,  is  found  to  be  within  the  compass  of  a  successful 
administration  of  all  the  departments  of  Government,  notwith- 
standing the  objections  and  anticipations  founded  on  its  extent 
when  the  Constitution  was  submitted  to  the  people.  It  is  true 
that  the  sphere  of  action  has  been  and  will  be  not  a  little  en- 
larged by  the  territories  embraced  by  the  Union.  But  it  will 
not  be  denied,  that  the  improvements  already  made  in  internal 
navigation  by  canals  and  steamboats,  and  in  turnpikes  and  rail- 
roads, have  virtually  brought  the  most  distant  parts  of  the 
Union,  in  its  present  extent,  much  closer  together  than  they 
were  at  the  date  of  the  Federal  Constitution.  It  is  not  too 
much  to  say,  that  the  facility  and  quickness  of  intercommunica- 
tion throughout  the  Union  is  greater  now  than  it  formerly  was 
between  the  remote  parts  of  the  State  of  Virginia. 

But  if  majority  governments,  as  such,  are  so  formidable,  look 
at  the  scope  for  abuses  of  their  power  within  the  individual 
States,  in  their  division  into  creditors  and  debtors,  in  the  dis- 
tribution of  taxes,  in  the  conflicting  interests,  whether  real  or 
supposed,  of  different  parts  of  the  State,  in  the  case  of  improv- 
ing roads,  cutting  canals,  &c,  to  say  nothing  of  many  other 
sources  of  discordant  interests  or  of  party  contests,  which  exist 
or  would  arise  if  the  States  were  separated  from  each  other.  It 
seems  to  be  forgotten,  that  the  abuses  committed  within  the  in- 
dividual States  previous  to  the  present  Constitution  by  inter- 
ested or  misguided  majorities  were  among  the  prominent  causes 
of  its  adoption,  and  particularly  led  to  the  provision  contained 
in  it  which  prohibits  paper  emissions  and  the  violations  of  con- 
tracts, and  which  gives  an  appellate  supremacy  to  the  judicial 
department  of  the  United  States.  Those  who  framed  and  rati- 
fied the  Constitution  believed  that,  as  power  was  less  likely  to 
be  abused  by  majorities  in  representative  governments  than  in 
democracies,  where  the  people  assembled  in  mass,  and  less  likely 
in  the  larger  than  in  the  smaller  communities  under  a  represent- 
ative government,  inferred  also,  that  by  dividing  the  power? 
of  government,  and  thereby  enlarging  the  practicable  sphere  of 


1833.  LETTERS.  309 

government,  unjust  majorities  would  be  formed  with  still  more 
difficulty,  and  be,  therefore,  the  less  to  be  dreaded;  and  what- 
ever may  have  been  the  just  complaints  of  unequal  laws  and  sec- 
tional partialities  under  the  majority  Government  of  the  United 
States,  it  may  be  confidently  observed  that  the  abuses  have  been 
less  frequent  and  less  palpable  than  those  which  disfigured  the 
administrations  of  the  State  governments,  while  all  the  effective 
power  of  sovereignty  were  separately  exercised  by  them.  If 
bargaining  interests  and  views  have  created  majorities  under 
the  federal  system,  what,  it  may  be  asked,  was  the  case  in  this 
respect  antecedent  to  this  system,  and  what,  but  for  this,  would 
now  be  the  case  in  the  State  governments?  It  has  been  said 
that  all  government  is  an  evil.  It  would  be  more  proper  to  say 
that  the  necessity  of  any  government  is  a  misfortune.  This  ne- 
cessity, however,  exists;  and  the  problem  to  be  solved  is,  not 
what  form  of  government  is  perfect,  but  which  of  the  forms  is 
least  imperfect;  and  here  the  general  question  must  be  between 
a  republican  government,  in  which  the  majority  rule  the  minor- 
ity, and  a  government  in  which  a  lesser  number  or  the  least 
number  rule  the  majority.  If  the  republican  form  is,  as  all  of 
us  agree,  to  be  preferred,  the  final  question  must  be,  what  is  the 
structure  of  it  that  will  best  guard  against  precipitate  counsels 
and  factious  combinations  for  unjust  purposes,  without  a  sacri- 
fice of  the  fundamental  principle  of  republicanism  ?  Those  who 
denounce  majority  governments  altogether  because  they  may 
have  an  interest  in  abusing  their  power,  denounce  at  the  same 
time  all  republican  government,  and  must  maintain  that  minority 
governments  would  feel  less  of  the  bias  of  interest  or  the  seduc- 
tions of  power. 

As  a  source  of  discordant  interests  within  particular  States, 
reference  may  be  made  to  the  diversity  in  the  applications  of 
agricultural  labour,  more  or  less  visible  in  all  of  them.  Take, 
for  example,  Virginia  herself.  Her  products  for  market  are  in 
one  district  Indian  corn  and  cotton;  in  another,  chiefly  tobacco; 
in  another,  tobacco  and  wheat;  in  another,  chiefly  wheat,  rye, 
and  live  stock.     This  diversity  of  agricultural  interests,  though 


330  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

greater  in  Virginia  than  elsewhere,  prevails  in  different  degrees 
within  most  of  the  States. 

Virginia  is  a  striking  example  also  of  a  diversity  of  inter- 
ests, real  or  supposed,  in  the  great  and  agitating  subjects  of  roads 
and  water  communications,  the  improvements  of  which  are  little 
needed  in  some  parts  of  the  State,  though  of  the  greatest  import- 
ance in  others;  and  in  the  parts  needing  them  much  disagree- 
ment exists  as  to  the  times,  modes,  and  the  degrees  of  the  public 
patronage,  leaving  room  for  an  abuse  of  power  by  majorities, 
and  for  majorities  made  up  by  affinities  of  interests,  losing  sight 
of  the  just  and  general  interest. 

Even  in  the  great  distinctions  of  interest  and  of  policy  gene- 
rated by  the  existence  of  slavery,  is  it  much  less  between  the 
Eastern  and  Western  districts  of  Virginia  than  between  the 
Southern  and  Northern  sections  of  the  Union?  If  proof  were 
necessary,  it  would  be  found  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Virginia 
Convention  of  1829-30,  and  in  the  debates  of  her  Legislature 
in  1830-31.  Never  were  questions  more  uniformly  or  more 
tenaciously  decided  between  the  North  and  the  South  in  Con- 
gress, than  they  were  on  those  occasions  between  the  West  and 
the  East  of  Virginia. 

But  let  us  bring  this  question  to  the  test  of  the  tariff  itself 
[out  of  which  it  has  grown,]  and  under  the  influences  of  which 
it  has  been  inculcated,  that  a  permanent  incompatibility  of  in- 
terests exists  in  the  regulations  of  foreign  commerce  between 
the  agricultural  and  the  mnnufacturing  population,  rendering  it 
unsafe  for  the  former  to  be  under  a  majority  power  when  patron- 
izing the  latter. 

In  all  countries,  the  mass  of  people  become,  sooner  or  later, 
divided  mainly  into  the  class  which  raises  food  and  raw  mate- 
rials, and  the  class  which  provides  clothing  and  the  other  neces- 
saries and  conveniences  of  life.  As  hands  fail  of  profitable  em- 
ployment in  the  culture  of  the  earth,  they  enter  into  the  latter 
class.  Hence,  in  the  Old  World,  we  find  the  nations  everywhere 
formed  into  these  grand  divisions,  one  or  the  other  being  a 
decided  majority  of  the  whole,  and  the  regulations  of  their  rela- 


1833.  LETTERS.  331 

tivc  interests  among  the  most  arduous  tasks  of  the  government. 
Although  the  mutuality  of  interest  in  the  interchanges  useful  to 
both  may,  in  one  view,  be  a  bond  of  amity  and  union,  yet,  when 
the  imposition  of  taxes,  whether  internal  or  external,  takes 
place,  as  it  must  do,  the  difficulty  of  equalising  the  burden  and 
adjusting  the  interests  between  the  two  classes  is  always  more 
or  less  felt.  When  imposts  on  foreign  commerce  have  a  pro- 
tective as  well  as  a  revenue  object,  the  task  of  adjustment  as- 
sumes a  peculiar  arduousness. 

This  view  of  the  subject  is  exemplified  in  all  its  features  by 
the  fiscal  and  protective  legislation  of  Great  Britain;  and  it  is 
worthy  of  special  remark  that  there  the  advocates  of  the  pro- 
tective policy  belong  to  the  landed  interest,  and  not,  as  in  the 
United  States,  to  the  manufacturing  interest;  though,  in  some 
particulars,  both  interests  are  suitors  for  protection  against  for- 
eign competition. 

But  so  far  as  abuses  of  power  are  engendered  by  a  division 
of  a  community  into  the  agricultural  and  manufacturing  inter- 
ests, and  by  the  necessary  ascendency  of  one  or  the  other,  as 
it  may  comprise  the  majority,  the  question  to  be  decided  is, 
whether  the  danger  of  oppression  from  this  source  must  not 
soon  arise  within  the  several  States  themselves,  and  render  a 
majority  government  as  unavoidable  an  evil  in  the  States  indi- 
vidually, as  it  is  represented  to  be  in  the  States  collectively. 

That  Virginia  must  soon  become  manufacturing  as  well  as 
agricultural,  and  be  divided  into  these  two  great  interests,  is 
obvious  and  certain.  Manufactures  grow  out  of  the  labour  not 
needed  for  agriculture,  and  labour  will  cease  to  be  so  needed  or 
employed  as  its  products  satisfy  and  satiate  the  demands  for 
domestic  use  and  for  foreign  markets.  Whatever  be  the  abund- 
auce  or  fertility  of  the  soil,  it  will  not  be  cultivated  when  its 
fruits  must  perish  on  hand  for  want  of  a  market.  And  is  it  not 
manifest  that  this  must  be  henceforward  more  and  more  the  case 
in  this  State  particularly?  The  earth  produces  at  this  time  as 
much  as  is  called  for  by  the  home  and  the  foreign  markets;  while 
the  labouring  population,  notwithstanding  the  emigration  to  the 
West  and  the  Southwest,  is  fast  increasing.     Nor  can  we  shut 


332  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833. 

our  eyes  to  the  fact,  that  the  rapid  increase  of  the  exports  of 
flour  and  tobacco  from  a  new  and  more  fertile  soil  will  be  con- 
tinually lessening  the  demand  on  Virginia  for  her  two  great 
staples,  and  be  forcing  her,  by  the  inability  to  pay  for  imports 
by  exports,  to  provide  within  herself  substitutes  for  the  former. 

Under  every  aspect  of  the  subject,  it  is  clear  that  Virginia 
must  be  speedily  a  manufacturing  as  well  as  an  agricultural  State; 
that  the  people  will  be  formed  into  the  same  great  classes  here 
as  elsewhere;  that  the  case  of  the  tariff  must,  of  course,  among 
other  conflicting  cases,  real  or  supposed,  be  decided  by  the  repub- 
lican rule  of  majorities;  and,  consequently,  if  majority  govern- 
ments, as  such,  be  the  worst  of  governments,  those  who  think 
and  say  so  cannot  be  within  the  pale  of  the  republican  faith. 
They  must  either  join  the  avowed  disciples  of  aristocracy,  oli- 
garchy, or  monarchy,  or  look  for  a  Utopia  exhibiting  a  perfect 
homogeneousness  of  interests,  opinions,  and  feelings  nowhere 
yet  found  in  civilized  communities.  Into  how  many  parts  must 
Virginia  be  split  before  the  semblance  of  such  a  condition  could 
be  found  in  any  of  them?  In  the  smallest  of  the  fragments,  there 
would  soon  be  added  to  previous  sources  of  discord  a  manufac- 
turing and  an  agricultural  class,  with  the  difficulty  experienced 
in  adjusting  their  relative  interests  in  the  regulation  of  foreign 
commerce  if  any,  or,  if  none,  in  equalising  the  burden  of  inter- 
nal improvement  and  of  taxation  within  them.  On  the  suppo- 
sition that  these  difficulties  could  be  surmounted,  how  many 
other  sources  of  discords  to  be  decided  by  the  majority  would 
remain?  Let  those  who  doubt  it  consult  the  records  of  corpor- 
ations of  every  size,  such  even  as  have  the  greatest  apparent 
simplicity  and  identity  of  pursuits  and  interests. 

In  reference  to  the  conflicts  of  interests  between  the  agricul- 
tural and  manufacturing  States,  it  is  a  consoling  anticipation 
that,  as  far  as  the  legislative  encouragements  to  one  may  not 
involve  an  actual  or  early  compensation  to  the  other,  it  will 
accelerate  a  state  of  things  in  which  the  conflict  between  them 
will  cease  and  be  succeeded  by  an  interchange  of  the  products 
profitable  to  both;  converting  a  source  of  discord  among  the 
States  into  a  new  cement  of  the  Union,  and  giving  to  the  coun- 


1833.  LETTERS.  333 

try  a  supply  of  its  essential  wants  independent  of  contingencies 
and  vicissitudes  incident  to  foreign  commerce. 

It  may  be  objected  to  majority  governments,  that  the  major- 
ity, as  formed  by  the  Constitution,  may  be  a  minority  when 
compared  with  the  popular  majority.  This  is  likely  to  be  the 
case  more  or  less  in  all  elective  governments.  It,  is  so  in  many 
of  the  States.  It  will  always  be  so  where  property  is  combined 
with  population  in  the  election  and  apportionment  of  represent- 
ation. It  must  be  still  more  the  case  with  confederacies,  in 
which  the  members,  however  unequal  in  population,  have  equal 
votes  in  the  administration  of  the  government.  In  the  com- 
pound system  of  the  United  States,  though  much  less  than  in 
mere  confederacies,  it  also  necessarily  exists  to  a  certain  extent. 
That  this  departure  from  the  rule  of  equality,  creating  a  politi- 
cal and  constitutional  majority  in  contradistinction  to  a  numer- 
ical majority  of  the  people,  may  be  abused  in  various  degrees 
oppressive  to  the  majority  of  the  people,  is  certain;  and  in  modes 
and  degrees  so  oppressive  as  to  justify  ultra  or  anti-constitu- 
tional resorts  to  adequate  relief  is  equally  certain.  Still  the 
constitutional  majority  must  be  acquiesced  in  by  the  constitu- 
tional minority,  while  the  Constitution  exists.  The  moment 
that  arrangement  is  successfully  frustrated,  the  Constitution  is 
at  an  end.  The  only  remedy,  therefore,  for  the  oppressed  mi- 
nority is  in  the  amendment  of  the  Constitution  or  a  subversion 
of  the  Constitution.  This  inference  is  unavoidable.  While  the 
Constitution  is  in  force,  the  power  created  by  it,  whether  a  pop- 
ular minority  or  majority,  must  be  the  legitimate  power,  and 
obeyed  as  the  only  alternative  to  the  dissolution  of  all  govern- 
ment. It  is  a  favourable  consideration,  in  the  impossibility  of 
securing  in  all  cases  a  coincidence  of  the  constitutional  and  nu- 
merical majority,  that  when  the  former  is  the  minority,  the  ex- 
istence of  a  numerical  majority  with  justice  on  its  side,  and  its 
influence  on  public  opinion,  will  be  a  salutary  control  on  the 
abuse  of  power  by  a  minority  constitutionally  possessing  it:  a 
control  generally  of  adequate  force,  where  a  military  force,  the 
disturber  of  all  the  ordinary  movements  of  free  governments,  is 
not  on  the  side  of  the  minority. 


;;;;  I  w  0  R  KS    0  P    M  A  DISON.  1833. 

'lii'  rc  ult  of  ili«'  whole  I  i,  that  wo  mm  t  refer  to  the  monitory 
reflection  that  no  government  of  human  device  and  human  ad 
ministration  can  bo  perfect)  that  that  which  i    the  least  imper- 
fect i ;  thorofore  the  bo  t  government;  that  the  abu  e   of  all 
othei  governments  have  l<  <l  to  the  preference  of  republican  goi 
ornmonl  qi  the  beet  of  all  government! ,  because  the  Icai  I  imper 
feet;  that  the  vital  principle  of  republican  governmenl  ii    the 
lea  rnqj'orU  partis,  the  will  of  the  majority;  that  if  the  will  of  a 
majority  cannot  be  trusted  where  there  are  diversified  and  con 
HiHiii"  intorei  ti ,  h  can  bo  trusted  nowhere,  becau  >■   uch  inter* 
<■,  i:  oxist  evorywhore;  that  If  the  manufacturing  and  agricultu- 
ral intoroi  i    l"'  of  :ill  interc  I    the  mo  t  conflicting  in  the  mo  t 

mm | mm  i:in  i  operal of  government,  and  ;i  majority  government 

over  them  be  the  most  Intolerable  of  ;ill  governments,  it  mui  t 
be  as  intolerable  within  the  States  as  it  is  represented  i«>  be  in 
the  United  Statos;  and,  Anally,  that  the  advocates  of  the  doc 
trine,  to  !><•  consistent,  mu  il  reject  it  in  the  former  as  well  ai  in 
the  latter,  and  sooli  a  refuge  undor  an  authority  master  of  both. 


To   "  \    i'kiknm   OF   UNION    A  N  l  >   STATE   RIGHTS." 
i  OmrfUlentlal.) 

1833. 

I  Imvo  roooived  the  letter  Bigned  A  Friend  of  Onion  and 
State  Rights,"  onolosing  two  printed  essays  under  the  same  Big- 
nature. 

I I  i:  nol  usual  to  answer  communications  without  the  proper 
names  to  thorn,  But  the  ability  and  motives  disclosed  in  the 
<  ays  induce  me  to  Bay,  in  oomplianoe  with  the  wish  expressed, 
thai  I  do  nol  consider  the  proceedings  o£  Virginia  in  I7(.»s  99 
as  countenancing  the  doctrine  that  a  State  may  at  ivill  socede 
lit  mi  Its  constitutional  oompacl  with  ili«-  other  Statos.  A  right- 
ful seoossion  requires  the  consent  of  the  others,  or  an  abuse  of 
the  compact  absolving  the  secoding  party  from  the  obligations 
imposed  i>\  It. 

in  order  to  understand  the  reasoning  on  one  Bide  of  :i  ques* 


is:;:;.  LETTERS. 

lion,  ii  is  necessary  to  keep  in  view  the  precise  state  of  the 
question,  and  the  positions  and  arguments  on  the  other  Bide. 
This  is  particularly  necessary  in  questions  arising  under  our 
novel  and  compound  system  of  ro\  ernment,  and  much  error  and 
confusion  has  grown  oul  of  a  neglecl  of  this  precaution. 

The  case  \A'  the  alien   ami   sedition    laws  was  a  question    be 

tween  the  Government  of  the  United  States  and  the  constituent 
body,  Virginia  making  an  appeal  to  die  latter  against  (lie  as- 
sumptions o\'  power  l>\  the  former, 

The  case  of  :i  claim  in  a  Slate  to  Becede  from  its  union  with 
the  others  resolves  itself  into  a  question  among  the  Slates  them 
selves  as  parlies  to  the  compact. 

In  (he  furmei-  case  it  was  asserted  against  Virginia,  thai  the 
Stales  had  no  right   to  interpose  a  legislative  declaration  of  opiu 

iou  on  a  constitutional  point;  nor  a  righl  to  interpose  at  all 
against  a  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  CJnited  Siales, 
which  was  lo  l>e  regarded  as  a  tribunal  from  which  there  could 

he  no  appeal. 

The  objeel  ^(  Virginia  was  to  vindicate  legislative  declara- 
tions of  opinion;  to  designate  the  se\  era  I  constitutional  modes 
of  interposition  by  the  Stales  againsl  abuses  of  powerjand  to 

establish  the  ultimate  authority  of  the  Slates  as  parlies  lo  and 
Creators  of  the  Constitution,    to  interpose  against   the  decisions 

of  the  judicial  as  well  as  other  branches  of  the  Government,  the 
authority  of  the  judicial  being  in  no  sense  ultimate  out  of  the 
pun  ieu  and  forms  of  the  Constitution. 

Much  use  has  been  made  of  the  term  "respeotive"  in  the  third 
resolution  oi'  Virginia,  which  asserts  the  right  of  tho  Stales,  in 
cases  of  sufficient  magnitude,  to  interpose  for  maintaining  within 
their  rcspecii\e  limits  the  authorities,  &c,  appertaining  I"  them, 
the  term  "  respective"  being  construed  to  mean  a  constitutional 

righl   in  each    Stale   separately    to  decide  on  and    resist   by  force 

encroachments  within  iis  limits.     But,  to  say  nothing  of  the  dii 

linclion  between  the  ordinary  and   c\  Ireme  cases,  it   is  observe 
hie  that   in  this  as  in  Other  instances  throughout  the  resolutions, 
the  plural  number  "Slates"  is  used  in  referring  to  Ihcin;    lhal  a 

concurrence  ami  co  operation  o\'  all  might  well  be  contemplated 


336  W  0  R  K  S    0  F    MADISON.  ]  833. 

in  interpositions  for  effecting  the  objects  within  each;  and  that 
the  language  of  the  closing  resolution  corresponds  with  this 
view  of  the  third.  The  course  of  reasoning  in  the  report  on  the 
resolutions  required  the  distinction  between  a  State  and  the 
States.  It  surely  docs  not  follow  from  the  fact  of  the  States, 
or,  rather,  the  people  imbodied  in  them,  having,  as  parties  to 
the  compact,  no  tribunal  above  them,  that,  in  controverted 
meanings  of  the  compact,  a  minority  of  the  parties  can  right- 
fully decide  against  the  majority;  still  less  that  a  single  party 
can  decide  against  the  rest;  and  as  little  that  it  can  at  will 
withdraw  itself  altogether  from  its  compact  with  the  rest. 

The  characteristic  distinction  between  free  governments  and 
governments  not  free  is,  that  the  former  are  founded  on  com- 
pact, not  between  the  government  and  those  for  whom  it  acts, 
but  among  the  parties  creating  the  government.  Each  of  these 
being  equal,  neither  can  have  more  right  to  say  that  the  com- 
pact has  been  violated  and  dissolved,  than  every  other  has  to 
deny  the  fact  and  to  insist  on  the  execution  of  the  bargain.  An 
inference  from  the  doctrine  that  a  single  State  has  a  right  to 
secede  at  its  will  from  the  rest,  is,  that  the  rest  would  have  an 
equal  right  to  secede  from  it:  in  other  words,  to  turn  it  against 
its  will  out  of  its  union  with  them.  Such  a  doctrine  would  not, 
till  of  late,  have  been  palatable  anywhere,  and  nowhere  less  so 
than  where  it  is  now  most  contended  for. 

A  careless  view  of  the  subject  might  find  an  analogy  between 
State  secession  and  individual  expatriation.  But  the  distinc- 
tion is  obvious  and  essential.  Even  in  the  latter  case,  whether 
regarded  as  a  right  impliedly  reserved  in  the  original  social 
compact,  or  as  a  reasonable  indulgence,  it  is  not  exempt  from 
certain  conditions.  It  must  be  used  without  injustice  or  injury 
to  the  community  from  which  the  expatriating  party  separates 
himself.  Assuredly  he  could  not  withdraw  his  portion  of  terri- 
tory from  the  common  domain.  In  the  case  of  a  State  seceding 
from  the  Union,  its  domain  would  be  dismembered,  and  other 
consequences  brought  on  not  less  obvious  than  pernicious. 

I  ought  not  to  omit  my  regret,  that  in  the  remarks  on  Mr. 
Jefferson  and  myself,  the  names  had  not  been  transposed. 


1634.  LETTERS.  :;:;; 

Having  many  reason?  for  making  this  letter  confidential,  I 
must  request  that  its  publicity  may  not  be  permitted  in  any 
mode  or  through  any  channel.  Among  the  reasons  is  the  risk 
of  misapprehensions  or  misconstructions  so  common  without 
more  attention  and  more  development  than  I  could  conveniently 
bestow  on  what  is  said. 

Wishing  to  be  assured  that  this  letter  has  not  miscarried,  a 
single  line  acknowledging  its  receipt  will  be  acceptable. 


TO   THOMAS   S.    GRIMKE. 

Montpellier,  Jan?  (>,  1834. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  21st  of  August  last  was  duly 
received,  and  I  must  leave  the  delay  of  this  acknowledgment  of 
it  to  your  indulgent  explanation.  I  regret  the  delay  itself  less 
than  the  scanty  supply  of  autographs  requested  from  me.  The 
truth  is,  that  my  files  have  been  so  often  resorted  to  on  such 
occasions,  within  a  few  years  past,  that  they  have  become  quite 
barren,  especially  in  the  case  of  names  most  distinguished. 
There  is  a  difficulty,  also,  not  readily  suggesting  itself,  in  the 
circumstance  that  wherever  letters  do  not  end  on  the  first  or 
third  page,  the  mere  name  cannot  be  cut  off  without  the  mutila- 
tion of  a  written  page.  Another  circumstance  is,  that  I  have 
found  it  convenient  to  spare  my  pigeon-holes  by  tearing  off  the 
superscribed  parts  where  they  could  be  separated,  so  that  auto- 
graphs have  been  deprived  even  of  that  resource. 

You  wish  to  be  informed  of  the  errors  in  your  pamphlet  al- 
luded to  in  my  last.  The  first  related  to  the  proposition  of 
Doctor  Franklin  in  favour  of  a  religious  service  in  the  Federal 
Convention.  The  proposition  was  received  and  treated  with 
the  respect  due  to  it;  but  the  lapse  of  time  which  had  preceded, 
with  considerations  growing  out  of  it,  had  the  effect  of  limiting 
what  was  done  to  a  reference  of  the  proposition  to  a  highly  re- 
spectable committee.  This  issue  of  it  may  be  traced  in  the 
printed  Journal.     The  Quaker  usage,  never  discontinued  in  the 

vol.  iv.  22 


338  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

State  and  the  place  where  the  Convention  held  its  sittings,  might 
not  have  been  without  an  influence,  as  might  also  the  discord 
of  religious  opinions  within  the  Convention,  as  well  as  among 
the  clergy  of  the  spot.  The  error  into  which  you  had  fallen 
may  have  been  confirmed  by  a  communication  in  the  National 
Intelligencer  some  years  ago,  said  to  have  been  received  through 
a  respectable  channel  from  a  member  of  the  Convention.  That 
the  communication  was  erroneous  is  certain;  whether  from  mis- 
apprehension or  misrecollection,  uncertain. 

The  other  error  lies  in  the  view  which  your  note  L  for  the 
18th  page  gives  of  Mr.  Pinckney's  draught  of  a  Constitution  for 
the  United  States,  and  its  conformity  to  that  adopted  by  the 
Convention.  It  appears  that  the  draught  laid  by  Mr.  Pinckney 
before  the  Convention  was,  like  some  other  important  docu- 
ments, not  among  its  preserved  proceedings.  And  you  are  not 
aware  that  insuperable  evidence  exists  that  the  draught  in  the 
published  Journal  could  not,  in  a  number  of  instances,  material 
as  well  as  minute,  be  the  same  with  that  laid  before  the  Con- 
vention. Take,  for  an  example  of  the  former,  the  article  rela- 
ting to  the  House  of  Representatives,  more  than  any  the  cor- 
ner-stone of  the  fabric.  That  the  election  of  it  by  the  people  as 
proposed  by  the  printed  draught  in  the  Journal  could  not  be 
the  mode  of  election  proposed  in  the  lost  draught,  must  be  in- 
ferred from  the  face  of  the  Journal  itself;  for  on  the  6th  of 
June,  but  a  few  days  after  the  lost  draught  was  presented  to 
the  Convention,  Mr.  Pinckney  moved  to  strike  the  word  "peo- 
ple" out  of  Mr.  Randolph's  proposition,  and  to  "Resolve  that 
the  members  of  the  first  branch  of  the  National  Legislature  ought 
to  be  elected  by  the  Legislatures  of  the  several  States."  But  there 
is  other  and  most  conclusive  proof  that  an  election  of  the  House 
of  Representatives  by  the  people  could  not  have  been  the  mode 
proposed  by  him.  There  arc  a  number  of  other  points  in  the 
published  draught,  some  conforming  most  literally  to  the  adopted 
Constitution,  which,  it  is  ascertainable,  could  not  have  been  the 
same  in  the  draught  laid  before  the  Convention.  The  conform- 
ity, and  even  identity  of  the  draught  in  the  Journal,  with  the 
adopted  Constitution,  on  points  and  details  the  result  of  conflicts 


1834.  LETTERS. 


ZM 


and  compromises  of  opinion  apparent  in  the  Journal,  have  excited 
an  embarrassing  curiosity  often  expressed  to  myself  or  in  my 
presence.  The  subject  is  in  several  respects  a  delicate  one;  and 
it  is  my  wish  that  what  is  now  said  of  it  may  be  understood  aa 
yielded  to  your  earnest  request,  and  as  entirely  confined  to  your- 
self. I  knew  Mr.  Pinckncy  well,  and  was  always  on  a  footing 
of  friendship  with  him.  But  this  consideration  ought  not  to 
weigh  against  justice  to  others,  as  well  as  against  truth  on  a 
subject  like  that  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

The  propositions  of  Mr.  Randolph  were  the  result  of  a  consul- 
tation among  the  seven  Virginia  Deputies,  of  which  he,  being 
at  the  time  Governor  of  the  State,  was  the  organ.  The  propo- 
sitions were  prepared  on  the  supposition  that,  considering  the 
prominent  agency  of  Virginia  in  bringing  about  the  Conven- 
tion, some  initiative  step  might  be  expected  from  that  quarter. 
It  was  meant  that  they  should  sketch  a  real  and  adequate  Gov- 
ernment for  the  Union,  but  without  committing  the  parties 
against  a  freedom  in  discussing  and  deciding  on  any  of  them. 
The  Journal  shews  that  they  were,  in  fact,  the  basis  of  the  de- 
liberations and  proceedings  of  the  Convention.  And  I  am  per- 
suaded that,  although  not  in  a  developed  and  organized  form, 
they  sufficiently  contemplated  it;  and,  moreover,  that  they  em- 
braced a  fuller  outline  of  an  adequate  system  than  the  plan  laid 
before  the  Convention,  variant  as  that  ascertainably  must  have 
been,  from  the  draught  now  in  print. 

Memo. — No  provision  in  the  draught  of  Mr.  P.  printed  in  the 
Journal  for  the  mode  of  electing  the  President  of  the  U.  S. 


to  w.   c.  RIVES. 

Montpellier,  Feb?  1.5,  1834. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  the  copy  of  your  speech  on  the 
'4  Removal  of  the  Deposits,"  kindly  forwarded  in  pamphlet  form. 
It  has  certainly  treated  the  questions  embraced  by  it  with  the 
distinguished  ability  which  was  looked  for.     Whilst  I  feel  a 


340  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

pleasure  in  doing  it  this  justice  I  must  not  forget,  as  I  presume 
you  are  aware,  that  some  of  them  are  not  viewed  by  me  in  the 
lights  in  which  your  reasoning  presents  them. 


TO   DR.    BEN.    WATERHOUSE. 

Montpellier,  Mar.  1,  1834. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  your  favor  of  the  20th  ult.  with  a 
copy  of  your  "  Public  Lecture."  The  lecture  is  a  good  medicine 
for  the  bad  habits  which  it  paints  in  such  warning  colours.  The 
temperance  societies  appear  to  have  had  a  salutary  effect  in  di- 
minishing the  use  of  ardent  spirits,  the  worst  of  the  passions, 
because  it  is  a  moral  as  well  as  a  physical  one.  I  wish  the  so- 
cieties all  the  success  they  merit;  but  I  am  not  in  the  honorable 
relation  to  either  of  them  which  you  suppose. 

I  have  not  yet  seen  the  "  History  of  the  Hartford  Conven- 
tion; "  and  such  are  the  arrears  in  the  reading  I  have  assigned 
to  myself,  that  I  am  not  sure,  if  I  possessed  the  book,  that  I 
should  ever  be  able,  with  my  waning  strength  and  fading  vision, 
to  examine  a  work  filling  so  many  pages.  It  will  be  fortunate 
for  historical  truth,  and  for  individual  as  well  as  political  jus- 
tice, if  a  chastising  notice  of  its  spurious  contents  should  fall 
within  the  scope  of  the  masterly  pen  you  refer  to.* 

I  am  glad  to  find  that  your  penmanship  remains  so  perfect. 
My  greater  age,  with  its  rheumatic  auxiliary,  have  so  stiffened 
my  fingers  as  to  make  writing  laborious  and  clumsy.  Hence 
the  resort,  you  will  perceive,  to  borrowed  ones. 


TO   MAJOR   HENRY   LEE. 

Montpellier,  March  3,  1834. 

Majr  H.  Lee, — Your  letter  of"  November  14th  came  safely, 
though  tardily,  to  hand. 

I  must  confess  that  I  perceive  no  ground  on  which  a  doubt 

*  J.  Q.  Adams. 


1834.  LETTERS.  o±\ 

could  be  applied  to  the  statement  of  Mr.  Jefferson  -which  you 
cite.  Nor  can  it,  I  think,  be  difficult  to  account  for  my  declining 
an  Executive  appointment  under  Washington  and  accepting  it 
under  Jefferson,  without  making  it  a  test  of  my  comparative  at- 
tachment to  them,  and  without  looking  beyond  the  posture  of 
tilings  at  the  two  epochs. 

The  part  I  had  borne  in  the  origin  and  adoption  of  the  Con- 
stitution determined  me  at  the  outset  of  the  Government  to  pre- 
fer a  seat  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  as  least  exposing  me 
to  the  imputation  of  selfish  views;  and  where,  if  anywhere,  I 
could  be  of  service  in  sustaining  the  Constitution  against  the 
party  adverse  to  it.  It  was  known  to  my  friends  when  making 
me  a  candidate  for  the  Senate  that  my  choice  was  the  other 
branch  of  the  Legislature.  Having  commenced  my  legislative 
career  as  I  did,  I  thought  it  most  becoming  to  proceed,  under 
the  original  impulse,  to  the  end  of  it;  and  the  rather,  as  the 
Constitution,  in  its  progress,  was  encountering  trials  of  a  new 
sort,  in  the  formation  of  new  parties  attaching  adverse  con- 
structions to  it. 

The  crisis  at  which  I  accepted  the  Executive  appointment 
under  Mr.  Jefferson  is  well  known.  My  connexion  with  it,  and 
the  part  I  had  borne  in  promoting  his  election  to  the  Chief 
Magistracy,  will  explain  my  yielding  to  his  pressing  desire  that 
I  should  be  a  member  of  his  Cabinet. 

I  hope  you  received  the  copies  of  your  father's  letters  to  me, 
which  were  duly  forwarded;  and  I  am  not  without  a  hope  that 
you  will  have  been  enabled  to  comply  with  my  request  of  copies 
of  mine  to  him. 


TO   REVD   WILLIAM    COGSWELL. 

Montpellier,  March  10,  1S3L 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  18th  ultimo  was  duly  received. 
You  give  me  a  credit  to  which  I  have  no  claim,  in  calling  me 
"the  writer  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States."  This 
was  not,  like  the  fabled  Goddess  of  Wisdom,  the  offspring  of  a 


342  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

single  brain.  It  ought  to  be  regarded  as  the  work  of  many 
heads  and  many  hands. 

Your  criticism  on  the  "collocation"  [?]  of  books  in  the  Li- 
brary of  our  University  may  not  be  without  foundation.  But 
the  doubtful  boundary  between  some  subjects  and  the  mixture 
of  different  subjects  in  the  same  works,  necessarily  embarrass 
the  task  of  classification. 

Being  now  within  a  few  days  of  my  84th  year,  with  a  decay- 
ing health  and  faded  vision,  and  in  arrears  also  of  (he  reading 
I  have  assigned  to  myself,  I  have  not  been  able  sooner  to  ac- 
knowledge your  politeness  in  sending  me  the  two  pamphlets. 
The  sermon  combats  very  ably  the  veteran  error  of  entwining 
the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  polity.  Whether  it  has  not  left 
unremoved  a  fragment  of  the  argumentative  root  of  the  combi- 
nation, is  a  question  which  I  leave  others  to  decide. 

With  friendly  respects  and  salutations. 


TO    JOHN   M.    PATTON. 

(Confidenftal) 

March  24.  1834. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  the  copy  of  your  speech  on 
the  "  Virginia  Resolutions."  Though  not  permitting  myself  to 
enter  into  a  discussion  of  the  several  topics  embraced  by  them, 
for  which,  indeed,  my  present  condition  would  unfit  me,  I  will 
not  deny  myself  the  pleasure  of  saying  that  you  have  done  great 
justice  to  your  views  of  them.  I  must  say,  at  the  same  time, 
that  the  warmth  of  your  feelings  has  done  infinitely  more  than 
justice  to  any  merits  that  can  be  claimed  for  your  friend. 

Should  the  controversy  on  removals  from  office  end  in  the  es- 
tablishment of  a  share  in  the  power,  as  claimed  for  the  Senate, 
it  would  materially  vary  the  relations  among  the  component 
parts  of  the  Government,  and  disturb  the  operation  of  the 
checks  and  balances  as  now  understood  to  exist.  If  the  right 
of  the  Senate  be,  or  be  made,  a  constitutional  one,  it  will  enable 
that  branch  of  the  Government  to  force  on  the  Executive  de- 


1834.  LETTERS. 


343 


partment  a  continuance  in  office  even  of  the  Cabinet  officers, 
notwithstanding  a  change  from  a  personal  and  political  har- 
mony with  the  President,  to  a  state  of  open  hostility  towards- 
him.  If  the  right  of  the  Senate  be  made  to  depend  on  the  Legis- 
lature, it  would  still  be  grantdbh  in  that  extent;  and  even  with 
the  exception  of  the  heads  of  departments  and  a  few  other  offi- 
cers, the  augmentation  of  the  Senatorial  patronage,  and  the  new 
relation  between  the  Senate  directly  and  the  Legislature  indi- 
rectly, with  the  Chief  Magistrate,  would  be  felt  deeply  in  the 
general  administration  of  the  Government.  The  innovation, 
however  modified,  would  more  than  double  the  danger  of  throw- 
ing the  Executive  machinery  out  of  gear,  and  thus  arresting  the 
march  of  the  Government  altogether. 

The  legislative  power  is  of  an  elastic  and  Protean  character, 
but  too  imperfectly  susceptible  of  definitions  and  landmarks. 
In  its  application  to  tenures  of  office,  a  law  passed  a  few  years 
ago,  declaring  a  large  class  of  offices  vacant  at  the  end  of  every 
four  years,  and,  of  course,  to  be  filled  by  new  appointments. 
Was  not  this  as  much  a  removal  as  if  made  individually  and  in 
detail?  The  limitation  might  have  been  three,  two,  or  one  year, 
or  even  from  session  to  session  of  Congress,  which  would  have 
been  equivalent  to  a  tenure  at  the  pleasure  of  the  Senate. 

The  light  in  which  the  large  States  would  regard  any  inno- 
vation increasing  the  weight  of  the  Senate,  constructed  and  en- 
dowed as  it  is,  may  be  inferred  from  the  difficulty  of  reconciling 
them  to  that  part  of  the  Constitution  when  it  was  adopted. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  may  doubtless  disclose, 
from  time  to  time,  faults  which  call  for  the  pruning  or  the  in- 
grafting hand.  But  remedies  ought  to  be  applied,  not  in  the 
paroxysms  of  party  and  popular  excitements:  but  with  the  more 
leisure  and  reflection,  as  the  great  departments  of  power  accord- 
ing to  experience  may  oe  successively  and  alternately  in  and 
out  of  public  favour;  and  as  changes  hastily  accommodated  to 
these  vicissitudes  would  destroy  the  symmetry  and  the  stability 
aimed  at  in  our  political  system.  I  am  making  observations, 
however,  very  superfluous  when  addressd  to  you,  and  I  quit 


344  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

thern,  therefore,  with  a  tender  of  cordial  regards  and  saluta- 
tions which  I  pray  you  to  accept. 


TO  THE  COMMITTEE  OF  4TH  JULY   DEMOCRATIC   FESTIVAL,   PHILA- 
DELPHIA. 

I  have  received,  fellow-citizens,  your  letter  inviting  me  to  the 
Democratic  festival  to  be  given  on  the  4th  of  July.  I  beg  that 
the  company  may  be  assured  of  my  due  respect  for  so  kind  a 
mark  of  their  attention.  But  the  gratiheation  I  might  feel  in 
being  present  on  an  occasion  cherishing  the  constitutional  doc- 
trines maintained  by  Virginia  in  1798-9,  as  an  authentic  view 
of  the  relations  between  the  Government  of  the  Union  and  the 
governments  of  the  States,  is  denied  to  me  by  the  debility  and 
indisposition  under  which  I  continue  to  labour. 

For  the  friendly  and  flattering  terms  in  which  the  committee 
have  conveyed  the  invitation,  they  will  please  to  accept  my  sin- 
cere acknowledgments;  and  for  the  requested  toast  I  beg  leave 
to  offer  the  memory  of  "  the  author  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, author  of  the  bill  establishing  religious  freedom  in 
Virginia,  and  Father  of  her  University." 

June  29,  1834. 


TO   JOHN    P.   KENNEDY. 

July  7th,  1834. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  with  your  letter  of  June  19th  the 
copy  of  your  discourse  on  the  life  and  character  of  William 
Wirt. 

The  condition  of  my  eyes,  added  to  my  general  debility  and 
my  continued  indisposition,  obliging  me  to  read  but  little,  and 
that  little  broken  by  intervals,  I  have  not  sooner  been  able  to 
avail  myself  of  the  pleasure  afforded  by  the  discourse. 

I  have  ever  regarded  Mr.  Wirt  as  among  the  most  distin- 
guished ornaments  which  his  country  could  boast,  and  though 


1834.  LETTERS.  345 

much  admired,  to  become  more  so  as  he  should  be  more  known 
in  all  the  interesting  features  which  characterized  him:  all  his 
friends,  therefore,  must  be  thankful  for  the  biographical  tribute 
to  his  memory,  which  groups  these  features  in  a  portrait  not 
unworthy  the  pencil  of  Mr.  Wirt  himself. 


TO   J.    Q.   ADAMS. 

MONTPELLIER,  July  30,  1834. 

DR  Sir, — The  copy  of  your  intended  speech  on  the  "Removal 
of  the  Deposits"  was  received  in  the  due  time;  but  such  was  and 
has  since  been  the  deterioration  of  my  health,  that  I  could  not 
give  it  a  proper  perusal.  Being  at  present  somewhat  relieved 
from  the  supervening  malady  under  which  I  have  been  more 
particularly  suffering,  I  avail  myself  of  this  circumstance  to 
thank  you  for  your  polite  attention.  I  have  found  in  the  pam- 
phlet, as  was  anticipated,  the  very  able  and  impressive  views 
which  have  always  distinguished  your  investigations  of  import- 
ant subjects. 

I  have  just  received  a  letter  from  Mr.  George  Joy,  of  London, 
with  whom  I  observe  you  are  not  unacquainted.  One  of  the 
papers  enclosed  by  him  contains  an  incident  in  the  career  of 
Lafayette,  which  he  seems  very  anxious  should  not  pass  into 
oblivion,  and  which,  indeed,  emphatically  marks  the  indelible 
affection  of  that  truly  admirable  man  for  our  country  and  for 
liberty.  As  it  is  understood  that  you  do  not  decline  the  task 
to  which  you  have  been  invited,  of  preparing  an  obituary  trib- 
ute to  his  memory,  I  have  thought  it  not  amiss  to  give  you  an 
opportunity  of  deciding  whether  the  narrative  of  Mr.  Joy  fur- 
nishes or  suggests  anything  worthy  of  a  more  durable  repository 
than  it  yet  has. 

Mr.  Joy  would,  I  am  sure,  be  gratified  by  your  perusal  of  his 
other  communications.  I  enclose  the  whole,  which  may  be  re- 
turned at  your  leisure. 

You  are,  I  presume,  not  unaware  that  this  gentleman  was, 
during  our  last  contest  with  G.  Britain,  a  copious  and  zealous 


34ft  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

writer  on  the  depending  topics,  with  views  always  of  the  best 
sort,  and  presenting  often  considerations  deserving  more  atten- 
tion than  they  received  from  the  British  rulers.  Some  of  his 
private  letters  to  me,  relating  to  the  "  Orders  in  Council,"  whilst 
known  on  the  spot  to  be  in  ovo,  and  expected  every  moment  to 
burst  the  shell,  are  valuable  as  confirming  the  grounds  on  which 
the  embargo  Avas  recommended  as  a  safeguard  to  our  commerce 
and  seamen,  against  the  sweeping  depredations  in  wait  for  them. 
On  the  supposition  that  you  arc  on  a  visit  to  Quincy,  I  ad- 
dress my  letter  accordingly.  Wherever  it  may  find  you,  it  will 
faithfully  express  the  high  esteem  and  cordial  regard,  with  the 
best  wishes  for  a  prolonged  and  happy  life. 


TO    EDWARD    LIVINGSTON. 

Montpellier,  August  2,  1834. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  favor  of  February  8  was  duly  received,  and 
I  regret  that  it  has  not  been  sooner  acknowledged.  But  such 
was  and  has  since  been  the  decrepit  state  of  my  health,  that  I 
have  been  obliged  to  avoid  as  much  as  possible  the  use  of  the 
pen.  Being  at  present  partially  relieved  from  a  supervening 
malady  under  which  I  have  for  a  considerable  time  been  par- 
ticularly suffering,  I  avail  myself  of  the  circumstance  to  tender 
you  the  delayed  thanks  for  your  kind  attention  to  my  letter  to 
Major  Lee.  Previous  to  the  receipt  of  your  letter,  I  had  taken 
the  liberty  of  a  second  intrusion  on  it,  for  which  I  must  thank 
you  in  advance. 

I  must  particularly  thank  you  also  for  your  outline  of  the 
condition  of  France.  It  has  given  me  a  more  distinct  view  of 
the  actual  state  of  things  there  than  I  had  derived  from  all  the 
public  accounts  put  together.  The  death  of  General  La  Fayette 
will  probably  not  be  without  an  influence  on  the  future  game 
of  parties.  But  at  this  distance  it  is  not  easy  to  say  in  what 
respect  it  will  be  most  felt.  As  the  head  of  the  Republican 
party,  which  is  understood  to  be  the  predominant  one,  he  gave 
it  its  full  force.    It  received  at  the  same  time  from  his  prudence 


1834.  LETTERS.  347 

and  patriotism  a  control  from  the  impetuous  and  misdirected 
career,  which  may  be  stimulated  by  other  leaders,  if  his  mantle 
should  fall  on  such  as  will  make  it  a  cloak  for  factious  or 
selfish  objects.  How  far  the  external  prospects  of  France  may 
be  affected  by  the  late  results  in  Portugal  and  Spain,  and  the 
consequent  policy  of  the  great  powers  of  the  North,  is  a  prob- 
lem which  well  may  puzzle  those  with  better  means  for  solving 
it  than  we  can  have  here.  The  general  conjecture  and  hope  is, 
that  the  popular  sympathies  throughout  Europe  are  becoming 
an  overmatch  for  the  intrigues,  combinations,  and  machinations 
of  Despotism. 

Of  the  present  condition  of  our  country  I  could  not,  if  I  were 
to  make  the  attempt,  in  my  retired  situation,  give  you  as  intel- 
ligible a  view  as  you  will  obtain  from  other  sources.  The  scene 
has  been  and  is  so  checkered  by  the  new  divisions  and  of 

parties,  that  a  development  of  it  requires  a  knowledge  of  secrets 
I  do  not  possess.  The  only  thing  certain  and  notorious  is,  that 
party  spirit  rages  with  all  its  vigor,  and  nowhere  more  than  in 
Virginia,  which  is  among  the  States  where  the  scales  seem  most 
on  a  poise. 

I  have  the  satisfaction  of  informing  you  that  in  the  midst  of 
our  political  agitations,  the  earth  is  silently  and  bountifully 
making  its  contributions  to  our  comfort  and  enjoyment.  The 
wheat  harvest  has,  with  but  few  exceptions,  been  a  good  one: 
and  the  crops  of  maize,  of  cotton,  and  of  tobacco,  now  in  embryo, 
promise  well. 

With  my  best  wishes  for  your  health  and  a  prolonged  and 
happy  life,  I  pray  you  to  be  assured  of  my  great  and  cordial 
esteem,  in  all  which  Mrs.  M.  joins  me,  as  I  do  her  in  the  offer 
of  respectful  and  kind  remembrances  to  Mrs.  L.  and  your 
daughter. 


348  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 


TO   LINN    BANKS   AND    OTHERS,    COMMITTEE. 

Montphllier,  Aug.  18,  1834. 

I  have  received,  fellow-citizens,  your  letter  of  the  1st  instant, 
inviting  me,  in  the  name  of  a  large  number  of  Democratic  Re- 
publicans of  your  county,  to  a  public  dinner  to  be  given  on  the 
23d  to  the  Honorable  John  M.  Patton,  their  representative  in 
Congress. 

My  continued  debility  from  age  and  sickness  not  permitting 
me  to  accept  the  invitation,  I  can  only  express  my  grateful 
acknowledgements  for  the  favorable  opinions  and  friendly  feel- 
ings which  prompted  it,  with  an  expression  of  the  high  respect 
in  which  I  hold  the  talents  and  patriotism  accorded  by  all  to 
the  character  of  the  representative  of  the  district. 

Adhering  myself  to  the  Resolutions  of  Virginia  in  1798,  as 
expounded  and  vindicated  in  the  Report  of  1799, 1  derive  pleas- 
ure from  every  proof  of  constancy  to  them  proceeding  from  re- 
spectable portions  of  my  fellow-citizens.  The  report,  too  often 
overlooked  in  comments  on  the  resolutions,  having  been  delib- 
erately sanctioned  by  representatives  chosen  by  the  people  with 
the  resolutions  before  them,  forms  the  fullest  and  surest  test  of 
the  principles  and  views  of  the  State. 

I  am  particularly  happy  in  being  able  to  say,  that  the  long 
period  during  which  you  refer  to  me  as  a  witness  of  the  benign 
operation  of  our  system  of  government,  not  only  confirmed  my 
belief  that  the  system,  in  its  twofold  character  of  a  Government 
for  the  Union  and  a  Government  for  each  of  the  States,  was 
superior  to  any  other  system  known  to  us,  but  that  it  strength- 
ened, moreover,  a  confidence  that  the  causes  which  had  been  so 
often  fatal  to  free  governments  would  find  in  the  healing  effi- 
cacy of  the  Constitution  itself,  and  in  the  amending  power 
always  residing  in  its  creators,  conservative  resources  adequate 
to  the  most  trying  occasions;  and,  consequently,  that  to  our 
country  will  belong  the  glory  you  claim  for  it,  of  having  solved 
propitiously  for  the  destinies  of  man  the  problem  of  his  capacity 
for  self-government. 

I  beg  the  committee,  in  communicating  the  acknowledgements 


1834.  LETTERS. 


349 


due  from  me  to  those  whom  they  represent,  to  accept  for  them- 
selves my  great  respect  and  best  wishes. 


TO  MR. . 

1834. 

Dear  SrR, — Having  alluded  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  as  a  constitutional  resort  in  deciding  questions 
of  jurisdiction  between  the  United  States  and  the  individual 
States,  a  few  remarks  may  be  proper,  showing  the  sense  and 
degree  in  which  that  character  is  more  particularly  ascribed  to 
that  department  of  the  Government. 

As  the  Legislative,  Executive,  and  Judicial  departments  of 
the  United  States  are  co-ordinate,  and  each  equally  bound  to 
support  the  Constitution,  it  follows  that  each  must,  in  the  exer- 
cise of  its  functions,  be  guided  by  the  text  of  the  Constitution  ac- 
cording to  its  own  interpretation  of  it;  and,  consequently,  that  in 
the  event  of  irreconcilable  interpretations,  the  prevalence  of  the 
one  or  the  other  department  must  depend  on  the  nature  of  the 
case,  as  receiving  its  final  decision  from  the  one  or  the  other, 
and  passing  from  that  decision  into  effect,  without  involving  the 
functions  of  any  other. 

It  is  certainly  due  from  the  functionaries  of  the  several  de- 
partments to  pay  much  respect  to  the  opinions  of  eacli  other; 
and,  as  far  as  official  independence  and  obligation  will  permit, 
to  consult  the  means  of  adjusting  differences  and  avoiding  prac- 
tical embarrassments  growing  out  of  them,  as  must  be  done  in 
like  cases  between  the  different  co-ordinate  branches  of  the 
Legislative  department. 

But  notwithstanding  this  abstract  view  of  the  co-ordinate  and 
independent  right  of  the  three  departments  to  expound  the  Con- 
stitution, the  Judicial  department  most  familiarizes  itself  to  the 
public  attention  as  the  expositor,  by  the  order  of  its  functions 
in  relation  to  the  other  departments;  and  attracts  most  the 
public  confidence  by  the  composition  of  the  tribunal. 

It  is  the  Judicial  department  in  which  questions  of  constitu- 


350  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

fionality,  as  well  as  of  legality,  generally  find  their  ultimate 
discussion  and  operative  decision:  ami  the  public  deference  to 
and  confidence  in  the  judgment  of  the  body  are  peculiarly  in- 
spired by  the  qualities  implied  in  its  members;  by  the  gravity 
and  deliberation  of  their  proceedings;  and  by  the  advantage 
their  plurality  gives  them  over  the  unity  of  the  Executive  de- 
partment, and  their  fewness  over  the  multitudinous  composition 
of  the  Legislative  department. 

Without  losing  sight,  therefore,  of  the  co-ordinate  relations  of 
the  three  departments  to  each  other,  it  may  always  be  expected 
that  the  judicial  bench,  when  happily  filled,  will,  for  the  rea- 
sons suggested,  most  engage  the  respect  and  reliance  of  the 
public  as  the  surest  expositor  of  the  Constitution,  as  well  in 
questions  within  its  cognizance  concerning  the  boundaries  be- 
tween the  several  departments  of  the  Government  as  in  those 
between  the  Union  and  its  members. 


Power  of  the  President  to  appoint  Public  Ministers  and  Consuls 
in  the  recess  of  the  Senate. 

The  place  of  a  foreign  minister  or  consul  is  not  an  office  in 
the  constitutional  sense  of  the  term. 

1.  It  is  not  created  by  the  Constitution. 

2.  It  is  not  created  by  a  law  authorized  by  the  Constitution. 

3.  It  cannot,  as  an  office,  be  created  by  the  mere  appointment 
for  it,  made  by  the  President  and  Senate,  who  are  to  fill,  not 
create  offices.  These  must  be  "  established  by  law,"  and  there- 
fore by  Congress  only. 

4.  On  the  supposition  even  that  the  appointment  could  create 
an  office,  the  office  would  expire  with  the  expiration  of  the  ap- 
pointment, and  every  new  appointment  would  create  a  new  of- 
fice, not  fill  an  old  one.  A  law  reviving  an  expired  law  is  a 
new  law. 

The  place  of  a  foreign  minister  or  consul  is  to  be  viewed  as 
created  by  the  law  of  nations,  to  which  the  United  States,  as 
an  independent  nation,  is  a  party,  and  as  always  open  for  the 


1834.  LETTERS.  35] 

proper  functionaries,  when  sent  by  the  constituted  authority  of 
one  nation  and  received  by  that  of  another.  The  Constitution, 
in  providing  for  the  appointment  of  such  functionaries,  presup- 
poses this  mode  of  intercourse  as  a  branch  of  the  law  of  na- 
tions. 

The  question  to  be  decided  is,  What  are  the  cases  in  which 
the  President  can  make  appointments  without  the  concurrence 
of  the  Senate?  and  it  turns  on  the  construction  of  the  power 
"to  fill  up  all  vacancies  that  may  happen  during  the  recess  of 
the  Senate." 

The  term  "all"  embraces  both  foreign  and  municipal  cases; 
and  in  examining  the  power  in  the  foreign,  however  failing  in 
exact  analogy  to  the  municipal,  it  is  not  improper  to  notice  the 
extent  of  the  power  in  the  municipal. 

If  the  text  of  the  Constitution  be  taken  literally,  no  munici- 
pal officer  could  be  appointed  by  the  President  alone  to  a  va- 
cancy not  originating  in  the  recess  of  the  Senate.  It  appears, 
however,  that  under  the  sanction  of  the  maxim,  qvi  Jwsret  in 
litera  Tweret  in  cortice,  and  of  the  argument um  ah  inconvenienti 
the  power  has  been  understood  to  extend,  in  cases  of  necessity 
or  urgency,  to  vacancies  happening  to  exist  in  the  recess  of  the 
Senate,  though  not  coming  into  existence  in  the  recess.  In  the 
case,  for  example,  of  an  appointment  to  a  vacancy  by  the  Pres- 
ident and  Senate  of  a  person  dead  at  the  time,  but  not  known 
to  be  so  till  after  the  adjournment  and  dispersion  of  the  Senate, 
it  has  been  deemed  within  the  reason  of  the  constitutional  pro- 
vision that  the  vacancy  should  be  filled  by  the  President  alone, 
the  object  of  the  provision  being  to  prevent  a  failure  in  the  ex- 
ecution of  the  laws,  which,  without  such  a  scope  to  the  power, 
must  very  inconveniently  happen,  more  especially  in  so  exten- 
sive a  country.  Other  cases  of  like  urgency  may  occur;  such 
as  an  appointment,  by  the  President  and  Senate  rendered  abor- 
tive by  a  refusal  to  accept  it.* 

If  it  be  admissible  at  all  to  make  the  power  of  the  President, 


*  It  appears  that  Mr.  Wirt  had  given  officially  the  same  construction  to  the 
term  "  happening, "  though  not  known  to  Mr.  If. 


352  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

without  the  Senate,  applicable  to  vacancies  happening  unavoid- 
ably to  exist,  though  not  to  originate  in  the  recess  of  the  Sen- 
ate, and  which  the  public  good  requires  to  be  filled  in  the  recess, 
the  reasons  arc  far  more  cogent  for  considering  the  sole  power 
of  the  President  as  applicable  to  the  appointment  of  foreign 
functionaries,  inasmuch  as  the  occasions  demanding  such  ap- 
pointments may  not  only  be  far  more  important,  but,  on  the  far- 
ther consideration,  that,  unlike  appointments  under  the  muni- 
cipal law,  the  calls  for  them  may  depend  on  circumstances  alto- 
gether under  foreign  control,  and  sometimes  on  the  most  im- 
probable and  sudden  emergencies,  and  requiring,  therefore,  that 
a  competent  authority  to  meet  them  should  be  ahvays  in  exist- 
ence. It  would  be  a  hard  imputation  on  the  framers  and  rati- 
fiers  of  the  Constitution,  that  while  providing  for  casualties  of 
inferior  magnitude,  they  should  have  intended  to  exclude  from 
the  provisions  the  means  usually  employed  in  obviating  a  threat- 
ened war;  in  putting  an  end  to  its  calamities;  in  conciliating  the 
friendship  or  neutrality  of  powerful  nations;  or  even  in  seizing 
a  favourable  moment  for  commercial  or  other  arrangements  ma- 
terial to  the  public  interest.  And  it  would  surely  be  a  hard 
rule  of  construction  that  would  give  to  the  text  of  the  Constitu- 
tion an  operation  so  injurious,  in  preference  to  a  construction 
that  would  avoid  it,  and  not  be  more  liberal  than  would  be  ap- 
plied to  a  remedial  statute.  Nor  ought  the  remark  to  be  omit- 
ted, that  by  rejecting  such  a  construction  this  important  func- 
tion, unlike  some  others,  would  be  excluded  altogether  from  our 
political  system,  there  being  no  pretension  to  it  in  any  other 
department  of  the  General  Government,  or  in  any  department 
of  the  State  governments.  To  regard  the  power  of  appointing 
the  highest  functionaries  employed  in  foreign  missions,  though 
a  specific  and  substantive  provision  in  the  Constitution,  as  inci- 
dental merely,  in  any  case,  to  a  subordinate  power,  that  of  a 
provisional  negotiation  by  the  President  alone,  would  be  a  more 
strained  construction  of  the  text  than  that  here  given  to  it. 

The  view  which  has  been  taken  of  the  subject  overrules  the 
distinction  between  missions  to  foreign  courts,  to  which  there 
had  before  been  appointments  and  to  which  there  had  not  been. 


1834.  LETTERS.  353 

Not  to  speak  of  diplomatic  appointments  destined,  not  for  sta- 
tions at  foreign  courts,  but  for  special  negotiations,  no  matter 
where,  and  to  which  the  distinction  would  be  inapplicable,  it 
cannot  bear  a  rational  or  practical  test  in  the  cases  to  which  it 
lias  been  applied.  An  appointment  to  a  foreign  court  at  one 
time,  unlike  an  appointment  to  a  municipal  office  always  requir- 
ing it,  is  no  evidence  of  a  need  for  the  appointment  at  another 
time;  while  an  appointment  where  there  had  been  none  before, 
may,  in  the  recess  of  the  Senate,  be  of  the  greatest  urgency. 
The  distinction  becomes  almost  ludicrous  when  it  is  asked  for 
what  length  of  time  the  circumstance  of  a  former  appointment 
is  to  have  the  effect  assigned  to  it  on  the  power  of  the  Presi- 
dent. Can  it  be  seriously  alleged,  that  after  the  interval  of  a 
century,  and  the  political  changes  incident  to  such  a  lapse  of 
time,  the  original  appointment  is  to  authorize  a  new  one  with- 
out the  concurrence  of  the  Senate,  while  a  like  appointment  to 
a  new  court,  or  even  a  new  nation,  however  immediately  called 
for.  is  barred  by  the  circumstance  that  no  previous  appointment 
to  it  had  taken  place?  The  case  of  diplomatic  missions  belongs 
to  the  law  of  nations,  and  the  principles  and  usages  on  which 
that  is  founded  are  entitled  to  a  certain  influence  in  expounding 
the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  which  have  relation  to  such 
missions.  The  distinction  between  courts  to  which  there  had, 
and  to  which  there  had  not  been  previous  missions,  is  believed 
to  be  recorded  in  none  of  the  oracular  works  on  international 
law,  and  to  be  unknown  to  the  practice  of  Governments,  where 
no  question  was  involved  as  to  the  de  facto  establishment  of  a 
Government. 

With  this  exposition  the  practice  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  has  corresponded,  and  with  every  sanction  of 
reason  and  public  expediency.  If  in  any  particular  instance 
the  power  has  been  misused,  which  it  is  not  meant  to  suggest, 
that  could  not  invalidate  either  its  legitimacy  or  its  general 
utility  any  more  than  any  other  power  would  be  invalidated  by 
a  like  fault  in  the  use  of  it. 

vol.  iv.  23 


354  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 


TO  N.   P.   TRIST. 

Montpellier,  August  25,  1834. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  yours  of  the  20th,  and  enclose  a 
fair  copy  of  so  much  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  letter  to  me  as  relates  to 
the  resolutions  of  1798-99.  The  letter  is  dated  August  23,  not 
28,  but  is  so  identical  with  the  printed  letter  to  W.  C.  Nicholas 
as  to  prove  that  one  of  the  dates  is  erroneous.  I  return  the  let- 
ter of  W.  C.  N.,  which  I  found  in  the  letter  of  Mr.  J.  I  find 
no  letter  from  Mr.  Jefferson  to  me  dated  November  26,  1799. 

The  letter  from  Mr.  Monroe  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  of  which  you 
enclosed  an  extract,  is  important.  I  have  one  from  Mr.  Mon- 
roe on  the  same  occasion,  more  in  detail,  and  not  less  emphatic 
in  its  anti-nullifying  language.  You  may  look  at  it  when  on 
your  promised  visit;  when,  also,  we  will  examine  the  file  of  my 
correspondence  with  Col.  J.  Taylor,  which  is  not  of  much  ex- 
tent. In  his  printed  argument  on  the  carriage  tax,  he  is  ex- 
plicit as  to  the  judicial  supremacy  of  the  United  States,  though 
a  champion  afterward  against  it. 

Have  you  seen  the  Journal  of  the  House  of  Delegates  in 
1798-99  ?  The  closing  scenes  of  the  resolutions  contain  a  vote 
of  the  minority,  expressly  denying  the  right  of  a  State  to  declare, 
protest,  &c,  &c,  and  crushing  the  assertion  that  the  right  was 
denied  by  no  one,  with  the  inference  that  the  resolutions  must 
have  intended  to  claim  for  a  State  a  nullifying  interposition. 

The  paper  enclosed  in  yours  has  been  disposed  of  as  you  sug- 
gested. We  look  with  pleasure  to  the  visit  which  your  letter 
promises;  in  the  mean  time,  accept  and  communicate  the  affec- 
tionate and  joint  salutations  of  Mrs.  M.  and  myself. 


TO  EDWARD   COLES. 

Montpellier,  August  29,  1834. 

I  have  received,  my  dear  sir,  your  favor  of  the  17th.     The 
motives  to  it  are  as  precious  to  me  as  its  object  is  controvertible. 


1834.  LETTERS. 

You  have  certainly  presented  your  views  of  the  subject  with 
great  skill  and  great  force.  But  you  have  not  sufficiently  ad- 
verted to  the  position  I  have  assumed,  and  which  has  been 
corded,  or  rather  assigned,  to  me  by  others,  of  being  withdrawn 
from  party  agitations  by  the  debilitating  effects  of  age  and 
disease. 

And  how  could  I  say  that  the  present  exciting  questions  in 
which  you  expect  me  to  engage  are  not  party  questions?  How 
could  I  say  that  the  Senate  was  not  a  party,  because  represent- 
ing the  States,  and  claiming  the  support  of  the  people,  or  that 
the  other  House,  representing  the  people  and  confiding  in  their 
support,  with  the  Executive  at  their  head,  was  less  than  a  party? 
now  could  I  say  that  the  former  is  the  nation,  and  the  latter 
but  a  faction  ? 

What  a  difference  again  between  my  relation  to  the  Resolu- 
tions of  98-99,  charged  on  my  individual  responsibility,  and  my 
common  relation  only  to  the  constitutional  questions  now  agita- 
ted! to  which  might  be  added  the  difference  of  my  present  con- 
dition from  what  it  was  at  the  date  of  my  published  exposition 
of  those  Resolutions,  and  the  habit  now  of  invalidating  opinions 
emanating  from  me  by  a  reference  to  my  age  and  infirmities. 

Would  not  candor  and  consistency  oblige  me,  in  denouncing 
the  heresies  of  one  side,  not  to  pass  in  silence  those  of  the  other? 
For  claims  are  made  by  the  Senate  in  opposition  to  the  princi- 
ples and  practice  of  every  Administration,  my  own  included, 
and  varying  materially,  in  some  instances,  the  relations  between 
the  great  departments  of  the  Government.  A  want  of  impar- 
tiality in  this  respect  would  enlist  me  into  one  of  the  parties, 
shut  the  ear  of  the  other,  and  discredit  me  with  those,  if  there 
be  now  such,  who  are  wavering  between  them. 

How,  injustice  or  in  truth,  could  I  join  in  the  charge  against 
the  President  of  claiming  a  power  over  the  public  money,  in- 
cluding a  right  to  apply  it  to  whatever  purpose  he  pleased,  even 
to  his  own?  However  unwarrantable  the  removal  of  the  de- 
posits, or  culpable  the  mode  of  effectuating  it,  the  act  has  been 
admitted  by  some  of  his  leading  opponents  to  have  been  not  a 
usurpation,  as  charged,  but  an  abuse  only  of  power.     And  how- 


356  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

ever  unconstitutional  the  denial  of  a  legislative  power  over  the 
custody  of  the  public  money  as  being  an  Executive  prerogative, 
there  is  no  appearance  of  a  denial  to  the  Legislature  of  an  abso- 
lute and  exclusive  right  to  appropriate  the  public  money,  or  of  a 
claim  for  the  Executive  of  an  appropriating  power,  the  charge, 
nevertheless,  pressed  with  most  effect  against  him.  The  dis- 
tinction is  so  obvious  and  so  essential  between  a  custody  and  an 
appropriation,  that  candour  would  not  permit  a  condemnation 
of  the  wrongful  claim  of  custody  without  condemning  at  the 
same  time  the  wrongful  charge  of  a  claim  of  appropriation. 

Candour  would  require  from  me  also  a  notice  of  the  disavowal 
by  the  President,  doubtless  real,  though  informal,  of  the  obnox- 
ious meaning  put  on  some  of  his  acts,  particularly  his  Proclama- 
tion: a  notice  which  would  detract  from  my  credit  with  those 
who  carefully  keep  the  disavowal  out  of  view  in  their  strictures 
on  the  Proclamation.  When  I  remarked  to  you  my  entire  con- 
demnation of  the  Proclamation,  I  added,  "  in  the  sense  which 
it  bore,  but  which  it  appeared  had  been  disclaimed."  In  fact, 
I  have  in  conversations,  from  which  I  apprehended  no  publicity, 
frankly  pointed  at  what  I  regarded  as  heretical  doctrines  on 
every  side,  my  wish  to  avoid  publicity  being  prescribed  by  my 
professed  as  well  as  proper  abstraction  from  the  polemic  scene. 
I  have  accordingly,  in  my  unavoidable  answers  to  dinner  invi- 
tations received  from  quarters  adverse  to  each  other,  but  equally 
expressing  the  kindest  regard  for  me,  endeavored  to  avoid  in- 
volving myself  in  their  party  views,  by  confining  myself  to  sub- 
jects in  which  all  parties  profess  to  concur,  and  to  the  proceed- 
ings of  Virginia  generally  referred  to  in  the  invitations,  and 
with  respect  to  which  my  adherence  was  well  known. 

Yon  call  my  attention  with  much  emphasis  to  the  principle 
openly  nvowed  by  the  President  and  his  friends,  that  offices  and 
emoluments  were  the  spoils  of  victory,  the  personal  property 
of  the  successful  candidate  for  the  Presidency,  to  be  given  as 
rewards  for  electioneering  services,  and  in  general  to  be  used 
as  the  means  of  rewarding  those  who  support,  and  of  punishing 
those  who  do  not  support,  the  dispenser  of  the  fund.  I  fully 
agree  in  all  the  odium  you  attach  to  such  a  rule  of  action.    But 


LETTERS. 

I  have  not  seen  any  avowal  of  such  a  principle  by  t" 
and  suspect  that  few  if  any  of  his  friends  would  openly  . 
The  first,  I  believe,  who  openly  proclaimed  the  right  and  p 
in  a  successful  candidate  for  the  Presidency  to  reward  fri 
and  punish  enei      -         removals  and  appointments,  is  now 
most  vehement  iu  branding  the  practice.    Indeed,  the  prii: 
if  avowed  without  the  practice,  or  practised  without  the  avowal, 
could  not  fail  to  degrade  any  Administration:  both  :  . 
completely  so.     The  odium  itself  would  be  an  antidote  to 

son  of  the  example,  and  a  seeuri:       a       -        e  permanent 
danger  apprehended  from 

What  you  dwell  on  most  is.  that  nullification  is  more  on 
decline,  and  less  dangerous,  than  the  popul.  -  lent 

.  which  his  unconstitutional  doctrines  are  armed.    In  t 
cannot  agree  with  you.    His  -  iitlvan*'. 

sinking  under  the  unpopularity  of  his  doctrines 
entire  States  which  have  abandoned  him:  I  -     a 

minorities  in  States  where  they  have  not  yet  become  majori:    - 
look  at  the  leading  partisans  who  have  abandoned  and  tu. 

a  :ist  him:  and  at  the  reluctant  and  qualified  support  given 
by  many  who  still  profess  to  adhere  to  him.  It  cannot  be 
doubted  that  the  danger  and  even  existence  of  the  |  bich 

have  grown  up  uuder  the  auspices  of  his  name  will  expire  v 
his  natural  or  his  official  life,  if  not  previously  to  either. 

:  the  other  hand,  what  more  daugerous  than  nullification, 
or  more  evident  than  the        a     —  it  continues  to  make,  either 
in  its  original  shape  or  in  the  disguises  it  assumes  ."     N 
tion  has  :t  of  putting  powder  under  the  Constitution 

and  Union,  and  a  match  in  the  hand  of  :ty  to  blow  ihem 

up  at  pleasure:  and  for  its  progress,  hearken  to  the  tone  in  which 
it  is  now  preached;  cast  your  eye  on  its  menacing  in.  -  g 
minorities  in  most  of  the  Southern  States  without  a  decrease  iu 
any  one  of  them.    Look  at  Virginia  herself,  and  read  in 

s.  and  in  the  proceedings  of  popular  meetings  gare 

which  the  anarchical  principle  now  makes,  in  contrast  with 
scouting  reception  given  to  it  but  a  short  time  ig 

It  is  not  probable  that  this  offspring  of  tl. . 


358  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

South  Carolina  will  ever  approach  success  in  a  majority  of  the 
States.  But  a  susceptibility  of  the  contagion  in  the  Southern 
States  is  visible,  and  the  clanger  is  not  to  be  concealed  that  the 
sympathies  arising  from  known  causes,  and  the  inculcated  im- 
pression of  a  permanent  incompatibility  of  interests  between 
the  South  and  the  North,  may  put  it  in  the  power  of  popular 
leaders  aspiring  to  the  highest  stations,  and  despairing  of  suc- 
cess on  the  Federal  theatre,  to  unite  the  South,  on  some  critical 
occasion,  in  a  course  that  will  end  in  creating  a  new  theatre  of 
great  though  inferior  extent.  In  pursuing  this  course,  the  first 
and  most  obvious  step  is  nullification;  the  next,  secession;  and 
the  last,  a  farewell  separation.  How  near  was  this  course  being 
lately  exemplified  ?  and  the  danger  of  its  recurrence  in  the  same, 
or  some  other  quarter,  may  be  increased  by  an  increase  of  rest- 
less aspirants,  and  by  the  increasing  impracticability  of  retain- 
ing in  the  Union  a  large  and  cemented  section  against  its  will. 
It  may,  indeed,  happen  that  a  return  of  danger  from  abroad,  or 
a  revived  apprehension  of  danger  at  home,  may  aid  in  binding 
the  States  in  one  political  system,  or  that  the  geographical  and 
commercial  ligatures  may  have  that  effect;  or  that  the  present 
discord  of  interests  between  the  North  and  the  South  may  give 
way  to  a  less  diversity  in  the  applications  of  labor,  or  to  the  mu- 
tual advantage  of  a  safe  and  constant  interchange  of  the  differ- 
ent products  of  labor  in  different  sections.  All  this  may  hap- 
pen, and,  with  the  exception  of  foreign  hostilities,  is  hoped  for. 
But,  in  the  mean  time,  local  prejudices  and  ambitious  leaders 
may  be  but  too  successful  in  finding  or  creating  occasions  for 
the  nullifying  experiment  of  breaking  a  more  beautiful  China 
vase*  than  the  British  Empire  ever  was,  into  parts  which  a 
miracle  only  could  reunite. 

I  have  thought  it  due  to  the  affectionate  interest  you  take  in 
what  concerns  me,  to  submit  the  observations  here  sketched, 
crude  as  they  are.  The  field  they  open  for  reflection  I  leave  to 
yours,  and  to  your  opportunity,  which  I  hope  will  be  a  long 
one,  of  witnessing  the  developments  and  vicissitudes  of  the  fu- 

*  See  Franklin's  letter  to   Lord  Howe  in  1776.     [20  July,  1776.     Franklin's 
works.     V.  101.     Sparks's  Ed.] 


1834.  LETTERS.  359 

ture.  I  need  not  say  that  the  letter  is  entirely  confidential.  It 
would  otherwise  do  what  it  endeavours  to  shew  I  ought  not  to 
do,  and  could  not  consistently  do. 

My  health  has  not  improved  since  you  left  us.  Mrs.  Madison 
joins  in  wishing  a  continuance  of  yours,  and  that  of  your  amiable 
partner,  and  all  other  happiness  to  you  both. 


TO   GEORGE   JOY. 

Montpellier,  Sepf  9.  1834. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  two  letters  of  June  4th  and 
11  th,  with  their  inclosures.  The  letter  to  your  brother  records 
a  touching  incident  in  the  life  of  Lafayette;  a  life  which,  if  his- 
tory does  it  justice,  will  fill  some  of  its  most  conspicuous  and 
interesting  pages.  Observing  that  Mr.  Adams  had  been  desig- 
nated by  Congress  to  prepare  an  obituary  memoir  of  the  man 
so  much  admired  and  beloved  by  our  country,  I  took  the  liberty 
of  inclosing  to  him  your  letter  to  your  brother,  that  the  incident, 
should  Mr.  Adams  not  decline  the  task  assigned  him,  might 
have  the  chance  of  being  better  guarded  against  the  oblivion 
you  wish  it  to  escape.  And  as  you  were  an  acquaintance  of 
Mr.  Adams,  I  thought  it  not  amiss  to  add  to  it  your  letter  to 
Sir  James  Graham,  and  to  both  your  two  letters  to  me,  pre- 
suming that  the  liberty  would  not  be  disagreeable  to  you,  nor 
unacceptable  to  Mr.  Adams.  The  manner  in  which  he  speaks 
of  you,  and  of  the  long  intimacy  between  the  two  families,  makes 
me  glad  that  I  did  so. 

The  Orders  in  Council  at  which  you  glance  have  a  relation  to 
our  Embargo  and  to  our  declaration  of  war,  which  gives  them 
a  historical  importance.  They  were  most  certainly  the  ground 
of  the  Embargo.  They  were  printed  in  an  English  newspaper 
in  the  very  words  they  bore,  with  an  intimation  that  they  would 
be  forthwith  promulgated;  and  the  newspaper  was  lying  on  the 
table  of  the  Cabinet  when  the  message  recommending  the  Em- 
bargo was  prepared.     With  this  authority  for  their  existence 


3G0  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

your  letters  to  me  were  in  precise  accordance.  Yet  the  spirit 
of  party  denied  at  the  time  that  the  Executive  had  any  knowl- 
edge of  the  fact,  and  there  arc  probably  not  a  few  still  under 
that  delusion,  with  a  danger  that  it  may  gain  credit  with  pos- 
terity. Had  Congress,  by  disregarding  such  a  state  of  things, 
exposed  our  whole  commerce  to  the  sweeping  depredation  which 
awaited  it,  they  would  have  deserved  the  reproaches  which  have 
been  lavished  on  the  Embargo.  The  duration  of  it  is  more  open 
for  discussion;  but  if  it  failed  of  success  it  might  be  explained 
by  the  evasions  and  obstructions  practised  in  the  most  commer- 
cial quarter  of  the  Union.  Had  these  been  apprehended  in 
time,  and  five  or  six  hundred  Marblehead  seamen  who  offered 
their  services  been  put  on  board  vessels  commissioned,  and  by 
proper  encouragements  animated  to  capture  smugglers  and 
carry  them  into  faithful  ports,  where  they  would  have  been  con- 
demned, the  measure  would  have  had  a  fair  trial,  and  the  issue 
might  have  been  very  different. 

In  relation  to  the  declaration  of  war,  the  Orders  in  Council 
had  an  agency  of  the  most  pointed  character.  Although  it  could 
not  be  unknown  that  the  U.  States  had  made  a  revocation  of 
the  Orders  a  sine  qua  non  of  the  continuance  of  peace,  the  Brit- 
ish envoy  here,  according  to  instructions,  communicated  in  ex- 
tenso,  and  for  the  eye  of  the  President,  a  dispatch  declaring  that 
the  Orders  in  Council  would  not  and  could  not  be  revoked,  leav- 
ing to  the  U.  States  no  alternative  but  disgraceful  submission 
or  an  appeal  to  the  ultima  ratio.  Notwithstanding  this  com- 
munication, not  many  weeks  elapsed  before  a  revocation  was 
produced  by  the  popular  distress,  but  not  in  time  to  prevent  the 
war  which  the  categorical  refusal  had  precipitated. 

There  were  circumstances  attending  the  termination  of  the 
war  not  unworthy  of  recollection.  During  the  negotiation  at 
Ghent,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  was  called  upon  to  say 
whether  "  the  war  taxes,"  limited  by  a  ministerial  pledge  to  the 
continuance  of  the  war,  would  be  prolonged  after  the  peace  in 
Europe  by  the  supervening  war  with  the  U.  States.  Aware 
that  the  objects  to  which  the  war  had  been  reduced  would  not 
reconcile  the  nation  to  the  obnoxious  taxes,  the  minister  made 


1834.  LETTERS.  3Q1 

no  reply,  the  Parliament  was  prorogued,  and  in  the  mean  time 
the  treaty  at  Ghent  brought  to  a  conclusion. 

It  is  not  improbable  that  some  of  the  particulars  I  have  re- 
ferred to  may  be  more  accurately  preserved  in  your  memory 
than  in  mine,  and  quite  certain  that  you  possess  more  convenient 
means  of  verifying  and  extending  them  than  my  situation  per- 
mits. 

I  sincerely  hope,  for  the  sake  of  humanity,  that  you  may  be 
right  in  your  anticipation  that  G.  Britain  will  put  an  end  to  her 
practice  of  impressment  at  home,  and,  for  the  peace  of  the  world, 
that  it  may  be  accompanied  by  a  relinquishment  of  her  preten- 
sions on  the  high  seas,  relating  to  impressments,  blockades,  the 
list  of  contraband,  and  some  others  vexatious  if  not  illegal,  not 
excepting  the  seizure  of  enemy  goods  in  friendly  vessels,  against 
which  she  herself  courted  a  stipulation  from  the  Dutch  when  her 
naval  power  had  a  match  in  that  of  the  Dutch,  and  for  which 
she  is  now  the  sole  advocate.  In  these  sacrifices,  if  so  to  be 
called,  a  facility  is  afforded  to  her  pride,  by  the  liberalizing 
spirit  of  the  age,  to  which  she  is  becoming  a  party;  and  it  can- 
not escape  her  foresight,  that  without  them  she  will  have  the 
maritime  world  to  contend  with,  the  new  as  well  as  the  old  half. 
The  former  presents  a  rapidity  of  growth,  forcing  itself  into  the 
calculations  of  all  sagacious  statesmen.  Judging  from  the  past 
twenty  years,  what  the  effect  of  the  next  twenty  will  be  in  the 
northern  portion  of  the  hemisphere,  and  may  be  in  the  southern, 
and  comparing  the  resources  for  building  and  loading  ships  on 
this  side  of  the  Atlantic  with  those  on  the  other,  the  vanity  of 
an  American  may  be  excused  for  supposing  that  the  Trident 
itself  will  at  no  remote  day  cross  the  Atlantic.  Nor  will  such 
an  event  be  retarded  by  arbitrary  or  monopolizing  expedients. 
Navigation  is  now  a  favorite  object  with  all  nations  having  an 
interest  in  it,  and  there  is  no  case  in  which  unequal  and  grasp- 
ing regulations  admit  a  more  simple  and  effectual  reciprocation, 
especially  if  the  articles  to  be  exchanged  should  give  an  advan- 
tage to  the  defensive  party. 

I  cannot  doubt  that  a  compilation  from  your  laudable  efforts 
in  print  and  in  your  private  correspondences,  first  to  prevent  a 


362  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

war  between  G.  Britain  and  the  U.  States,  and  next  to  hasten 
a  close  to  it,  will  be  acceptable  even  now  to  many  readers,  and 
a  valuable  contribution  at  any  time  to  the  annals  of  the  period. 
But  I  doubt  whether  any  of  the  communications  from  me  will 
merit  a  place  in  the  work.  Of  some  of  my  letters  copies  may 
not  have  been  retained,  in  the  hurry  of  an  extensive  private  cor- 
respondence incident  to  my  public  situation.  Those  on  my  files 
are  but  few,  and  if  not  to  be  prohibited,  not  of  sufficient  moment 
to  be  recommended  for  the  public  eye. 

The  last  letter  from  you,  previous  to  the  two  now  acknowl- 
edged, introduced  a  Mr.  Fuller.  Having  been  arrested,  on  his 
way  to  Montpclier,  by  some  requisite  change  in  his  arrange- 
ments, he  informed  me  of  it  in  a  letter  to  which  'the  inclosed  was 
an  answer.  From  the  return  of  it  lately,  as  a  dead  letter,  I  infer 
that  he  is  now  in  England.  If  so,  please  to  renew  the  seal,  and 
let  him  find  that  the  due  attention  was  given  to  him. 

You  express  a  regret,  and  almost  complaint,  at  the  intermis- 
sion of  my  letters.  I  cannot  but  feel  regret  myself  at  the  cause 
of  yours.  But  I  mingle  with  mine  the  reflection  that  yours  im- 
plies a  continuance  of  the  esteem  and  regard  which  I  have  always 
valued.  In  the  case  of  a  compliment  [?]  I  should  have  pleas,  of 
which  I  am  in  the  habit  of  reminding  my  friends,  and  to  which 
I  am  sure  you  would  be  among  the  last  to  demur.  I  am  now 
far  advanced  into  my  eighty-fourth  year,  with  a  constitution 
crippled  by  a  tedious  and  distressing  rheumatism,  to  the  effects 
of  which  have  been  added  other  indispositions,  one  of  which  is 
still  hanging  on  me,  and  with  the  further  addition  that  my  fin- 
gers are  so  stiffened  as  to  make  writing  awkward  and  laborious, 
and  my  vision  so  faded  as  to  make  reading  a  task  to  me.  I  sin- 
cerely wish  that  your  days  may  outnumber  mine,  with  an  ex- 
emption from  the  infirmities  which  have  beset  mine.  With  this 
wish  accept  all  other  good  ones. 

The  freedom  of  some  of  my  remarks,  and  the  extravagance, 
as  it  may  be  deemed,  of  some  of  my  speculations,  will  sufficiently 
suggest  that  my  letter  is  not  for  the  public  eye. 


1834.  LETTERS.  363 

TO   WILLIAM   H.    WINDER. 

MONTPELLIER,  Scpr  15,  1834. 

Dear  Sir, — I  am  sensible  of  the  delay  in  acknowledging  your 
letter  of  and  regret  it.     But  apart  from  the  crippled  con- 

dition of  my  health,  which  almost  forbids  the  use  of  the  pen,  I 
could  not  forget  that  I  was  to  speak  of  occurrences  after  a  lapse 
of  twenty  years,  and  at  an  age  in  its  84th  year;  circumstances 
so  readily  and  for  the  most  part  justly  referred  to,  as  impairing 
the  confidence  due  to  recollections  and  opinions. 

You  wish  me  to  express  personally  "  my  approval  of  your 
father's  character  and  conduct  at  the  battle  of  Bladensburg,"  on 
the  ground  "  of  my  being  fully  acquainted  with  everything  con- 
nected with  them,  aud  of  an  ability  to  judge  of  which  no  man 
can  doubt." 

You  appear  not  to  have  sufficiently  reflected,  that  having 
never  been  engaged  in  military  service,  my  judgment  in  the  case 
could  not  have  the  weight  with  others  which  your  partiality 
assumes  for  it,  but  might  rather  expose  me  to  a  charge  of  pre- 
sumption in  deciding  on  points  purely  of  a  professional  descrip- 
tion. Nor  was  I  on  the  field  as  a  spectator  till  the  order  of 
the  battle  had  been  formed,  and  had  approached  the  moment  of 
its  commencement. 

With  respect  to  the  order  of  the  battle,  that  being  known, 
will  speak  for  itself;  and  the  gallantry,  activity,  and  zeal  of 
your  father  during  the  action,  had  a  witness  in  every  observer. 
If  his  efforts  were  not  rewarded  with  success,  candour  will  find 
an  explanation  in  the  peculiarities  he  had  to  encounter;  espe- 
cially in  the  advantage  possessed  by  the  veteran  troops  of  the 
enemy  over  a  militia,  which,  however  brave  and  patriotic,  could 
not  be  a  match  for  them  in  the  open  field. 

I  cannot  but  persuade  myself  that  the  evidence  on  record,  and 
the  verdict  of  the  court  of  enquiry,  will  outweigh  and  outlive  cen- 
sorious comments  doing  injustice  to  the  character  and  memory 
of  your  father.  For  myself,  I  have  always  had  a  high  respect 
for  his  many  excellent  qualities,  and  am  gratified  by  the  assur- 
ance you  give  me  of  the  place  I  held  in  his  esteem  and  regard. 


364  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

TO   ISAAC    S.    LYON. 

Montpellier,  Sept'  20,  1834. 

DR  Sir, — I  must  apologise  for  the  great  delay  in  acknowl- 
edging your  letter  of  Ap1  20,  by  referring  (now  a  common  and 
necessary  resort)  to  the  feebleness  of  age,  accompanied  by  se- 
vere and  continued  inroads  on  my  health. 

My  respect  for  your  object  would  make  it  very  agreeable  to 
me  to  aid  it  in  the  way  you  mention.  But  in  looking  into  the 
parcels  of  pamphlets  I  possess,  I  find  none  that  would  supply 
the  specified  chasm.  Of  orations,  I  do  not  recollect  that  I  ever 
delivered  one  that  was  printed.  Of  addresses,  mine  have  been 
but  answers  to  addresses;  and  if  printed,  it  has  been  in  news- 
papers, not  in  pamphlets.  My  speeches,  so  far  as  printed,  have 
been,  with  scarce  an  exception,  bound  up  in  stenographic  vol- 
umes. I  recollect  that  my  share  in  the  debates  in  Congress  on 
the  Commercial  Resolutions,  called  the  Virginia  Resolutions, 
was  published  in  pamphlet  form;  but  it  happens  that  I  do  not 
possess  more  than  a  single  copy,  and  that  not  a  little  mutilated 
and  defaced.  It  may  not  be  amiss  to  remark,  that  the  steno- 
graphic reports  of  my  speeches,  as  doubtless  of  others,  those  of 
Lloyd's  particularly,  are,  where  they  were  not  revised  by  the 
speaker,  very  defective  and  often  erroneous;  and  that  where  re- 
vised, I  limited  myself  to  the  substance,  with  as  much  adherence 
to  the  language  as  my  memory  could  effect. 

I  am  sorry  that,  after  so  much  delay,  I  have  not  been  able  to 
give  a  more  adequate  answer  to  your  letter.  I  hope  the  expla- 
nation offered  will  be  found  not  inconsistent  with  the  respect 
and  good  wishes  which  I  pray  you  to  accept. 


TO   MANN   BUTLER. 

October  11,  1S3L 
DR  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  21  ult.,  in  which 
you  wish  to  obtain  my  recollection  of  what  passed  between  Mr. 
John  Brown  and  me  in  1788,  on  the  overture  of  Gardoqui, 


1834.  LETTER.-.  3Q5 

"  that  if  the  people  of  Kentucky  would  erect  themselves  into  an 
independent  State,  and  appoint  a  proper  person  to  negotiate 
•with  him,  lie  had  authority  for  that  purpose  and  would  enter 
into  an  arrangenment  with  them  for  the  exportation  of  their 
produce  to  New  Orleans." 

My  recollection,  with  which  references  in  my  manuscript  pa- 
pers accord,  leaves  no  doubt  that  the  overture  was  communica- 
ted to  me  by  Mr.  Brown.  Nor  can  I  doubt  that,  as  stated  by 
him,  I  expressed  the  opinion  and  apprehension  that  a  knowl- 
edge of  it  in  Kentucky  might,  in  the  excitements  there,  be  mis- 
chievously employed.  This  view  of  the  subject  evidently  re- 
sulted-from  the  natural  and  known  impatience  of  the  Western 
people  on  the  waters  of  the  Mississippi  for  a  market  for  the 
products  of  their  exuberant  soil;  from  the  distrust  of  the  Fed- 
eral policy  produced  by  the  project  of  surrendering  the  use  of 
that  river  for  a  term  of  many  years;  and  from  a  coincidence  of 
the  overture,  in  point  of  time,  with  the  plan  on  foot  for  consoli- 
dating the  Union  by  arming  it  with  new  powers — an  object,  to 
embarrass  and  defeat  which  the  dismembering  aims  of  Spain 
would  not  fail  to  make  the  most  tempting  sacrifices,  and  to  spare 
no  intrigues. 

I  owe  it  to  Mr.  Brown,  with  whom  I  was  in  intimate  friend- 
ship when  we  were  associates  in  public  life,  to  observe  that  I 
always  regarded  him,  whilst  steadily  attentive  to  the  interests 
of  his  constituents,  as  duly  impressed  with  the  importance  of 
the  Union,  and  anxious  for  its  prosperity. 

Of  the  other  particular  enquiries  in  your  letter,  my  great 
age,  now  in  its  84th  year,  and  with  more  than  the  usual  infirmi- 
ties, will,  I  hope,  absolve  me  from  undertaking  to  speak  without 
more  authoritative  aids  to  my  memory  than  I  can  avail  myself 
of.  In  what  relates  to  General  Wilkinson,  official  investiga- 
tions in  the  archives  of  the  War  Department,  and  the  files  of 
Mr.  Jefferson,  must,  of  course,  be  among  the  important  sources 
of  the  light  you  wish  for. 

It  would  afford  me  pleasure  to  aid  the  interesting  work 
which  occupies  your  pen  by  materials  worthy  of  it.  But  I  know 
not  that  I  could  point  to  any  which  are  not  in  print  or  in  pub- 


366  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834, 

lie  offices,  and  which,  if  not  already  known  to  you,  are  accessi- 
ble to  your  researches.  I  can  only,  therefore,  wish  for  your 
historical  task  all  the  success  which  the  subject  merits,  and 
which  is  promised  by  the  qualifications  ascribed  to  the  author. 
I  regret  the  tardiness  of  this  acknowledgment  of  your  letter. 
My  feeble  condition  and  frequent  interruptions  are  the  apology, 
which  I  pray  you  to  accept  with  my  respects  and  my  cordial 
salutations. 


TO   EDWARD    COLES. 

Octobkr  15,  1834. 

I  have  received,  my  dear  sir,  your  letter  of  the  15th  ultimo. 
I  did  not  anticipate  a  complaint  that  mine  was  not  full  enough, 
being  an  effort  which,  in  my  present  condition,  I  had  rarely  made. 
It  was  not  my  object  to  offer  either  a  plenary  or  &  public  review 
of  the  agitated  topics,  but  to  satisfy  a  friend  that  I  ought  not, 
in  my  eighty-fourth  year,  and  with  a  constitution  crippled  by 
disease,  to  put  myself  forward  on  the  implied  ground  that  my 
opinions  were  to  have  an  effect  which  I  ought  not  to  presume, 
and  which  I  was  well  persuaded  they  would  not  have.  If  I  did 
not  extend  my  remarks  to  every  obnoxious  doctrine  or  measure 
of  the  Executive,  I  was  under  no  apprehension  of  an  inference 
from  my  silence  that  I  approved  them;  and  there  was  the  less 
occasion  to  guard  against  the  inference,  as  I  had,  with  respect 
to  the  omitted  cases,  freely  expressed  my  views  of  them  iii  our 
private  conversations. 

Notwithstanding  your  cogent  observations  on  the  compara- 
tive dangers  from  the  popularity  and  example  of  General  Jack- 
son, and  from  the  doctrines  and  example  of  South  Carolina,  I 
must  adhere  to  the  opinion  that  the  former  are  daily  losing,  and 
the  latter  gaining  ground;  for  the  proof  of  which,  I  renew  my 
appeal  to  the  facts  of  daily  occurrence.  And  if  the  declension 
of  his  popular  influence  be  such  during  his  official  life,  and  with 
the  peculiar  hold  he  has  on  party  feelings,  there  is  little  reason 
to  suppose  that  any  succeeding  President  will  attempt  a  like 


1834.  LETTERS.  357 

career.  That  a  series  of  tliem  should  do  so  with  the  support  of 
the  people,  is  a  possibility  opposed  to  a  moral  certainty. 

May  I  not  appeal,  also,  to  facts  which  will  satisfy  yourself 
of  the  error  which  supposes  that  a  respect  for  my  opinion,  even 
naked  opinion,  would  control  the  adverse  opinions  of  others? 
On  the  subject  of  the  bank,  on  that  of  the  tariff,  and  on  that  of 
nullification,  three  great  constitutional  questions  of  the  day,  my 
opinions,  with  the  grounds  of  them,  are  well  known,  being  in 
print  with  my  name  to  them.  Yet  the  bank  was,  perhaps,  never 
more  warmly  opposed  than  at  present;  the  tariff  seems  to  have 
lost  none  of  its  unpopularity;  whilst  nullification  has  been  for 
some  time,  and  is  at  present,  notoriously  advancing,  with  some 
of  my  best  personal,  and  heretofore  political,  friends  among  its 
advocates. 

It  must  not  be  thought  that  I  am  displeased  or  disappointed 
at  this  result.  On  the  contrary,  I  honor  the  independent  judg- 
ment that  decides  for  itself;  and  I  know  well  that  a  spirit  of 
party  is  not  less  unyielding. 

You  observe  that  the  absorbing  question  of  Executive  mis- 
rule has  diverted  attention  from  nullification.  This  may  be  true, 
and  it  is  a  reason  for  not  mitigating  the  danger  from  it;  for  it 
is  equally  observable,  that  whilst  nullification  is,  on  one  hand, 
taking  advantage  of  the  diverted  attention,  it  is,  on  the  other, 
propagating  itself  under  the  name  of  State  rights,  by  diminishing 
the  importance  of  questions  between  the  Executive  and  other 
departments  of  the  Federal  Government,  compared  with  ques- 
tions between  the  Federal  and  State  governments,  and  by  in- 
culcating the  necessity  of  nullification  as  the  only  safeguard  to 
the  latter  against  the  former.  In  a  late  speech  of  the  reputed 
author  of  the  heresy,  which  has  been  lauded  as  worthy  of  letters 
of  gold,  this  view  of  the  subject  is  presented  in  the  form  most 
likely  to  make  converts  of  the  State  rights  opponents  of  the 
tariff  and  other  unpopular  measures  of  the  Federal  policy. 

Your  reasoning,  ingenious  as  it  is,  has  not  disproved  the  fair- 
ness of  the  distinction  between  a  claim  to  the  custody  of  the 
public  money  and  a  claim  to  the  absolute  use  or  appropriation 


368  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

of  it.  In  inferring  abuses  of  power  from  particular  instances,  it 
is  always  proper  to  keep  within  the  range  of  a  certain  degree 
of  probability.  The  distinction  in  this  case  is  so  palpable  and 
so  important  that  the  inference  from  a  claim  to  the  custody, 
however  unsound,  to  a  claim  of  appropriation,  is  not  only  dis- 
avowed by  the  partisans  of  the  former,  who  are,  probably,  not 
numerous,  but  the  distinction  is  triumphantly  urged  against 
their  adversaries,  who  disregard  it,  as  a  proof  of  their  disingen- 
uous and  fallacious  purposes. 

You  are  at  a  loss  for  the  innovating  doctrines  of  the  Senate 
to  which  I  alluded.     Permit  me  to  specify  the  following: 

The  claim,  on  constitutional  ground,  to  a  share  in  the  removal 
as  well  as  appointment  of  officers,  is  in  direct  opposition  to  the 
uniform  practice  of  the  Government  from  its  commencement. 
It  is  clear  that  the  innovation  would  not  only  vary,  essentially, 
the  existing  balance  of  power,  but  expose  the  Executive,  occa- 
sionally, to  a  total  inaction,  and  at  all  times  to  delays  fatal  to 
the  due  execution  of  the  laws. 

Another  innovation  brought  forward  in  the  Senate,  claims 
for  the  Legislature  a  discretionary  regulation  of  the  tenure  of 
offices.  This,  also,  would  vary  the  relation  of  the  departments 
to  each  other,  and  leave  a  wide  field  for  legislative  abuses.  The 
power  of  removal,  like  that  of  appointment,  ought  to  be  fixed 
by  the  Constitution,  and  both,  like  the  right  of  suffrage  and  ap- 
portionment of  Representatives,  to  be  not  dependent  on  the 
legislative  will.  In  republican  governments  the  organization 
of  the  executive  department  will  always  be  found  the  most  diffi- 
cult and  delicate,  particularly  in  regard  to  the  appointment,  and, 
most  of  all,  to  the  removal  of  officers.  It  may  well  deserve  con- 
sideration, how  far  the  present  modification  of  these  powers  can 
be  constitutionally  improved.  But  apart  from  the  distracting 
and  dilatory  operation  of  a  veto  in  the  Senate  on  the  removal 
from  office,  it  is  pretty  certain  that  the  large  States  would  not 
invest  with  that  additional  prerogative  a  body  constructed  like 
the  Senate,  and  endowed,  as  it  already  is,  with  a  share  in  all  the 
departments  of  power,  Legislative,  Executive,  and  Judiciary. 


1834.  LETTERS.  ;;,;</, 

It  is  well  known  that  the  large  States,  in  both  the  Federal  and 
State  Conventions,  regarded  the  aggregate  powers  of  the  Sen- 
ate as  the  most  objectionable  feature  in  the  Constitution. 

Another  novelty  of  great  practical  importance  is  the  alleged 
limitation  of  the  qualified  veto  of  the  President  to  constitutional 
objections.  That  it  extends  to  cases  of  inexpediency  also,  and 
was  so  understood  and  so  vindicated,  (see  the  Federalist,)  can- 
not be  doubted.  My  veto  to  the  bank  was  expressly  to  the  in- 
expediency of  its  plan,  and  the  validity  of  the  veto  was  never 
questioned.  As  a  shield  to  the  Executive  department  against 
legislative  encroachments,  and  a  general  barrier  to  the  Constitu- 
tion against  them,  it  was  doubtless  expected  to  be  a  valuable  pro- 
vision. But  a  primary  object  of  the  prerogative  most  assuredly 
was  that  of  a  check  to  the  instability  in  legislation,  which  had 
been  found  the  besetting  infirmity  of  popular  governments,  and 
been  sufficiently  exemplified  among  ourselves  in  the  Legislatures 
of  the  States;  and  I  leave  yourself  to  decide  how  far,  in  a  reversal 
of  the  case,  an  application  of  the  veto  to  a  defence  of  the  bank 
against  a  legislative  hostility  to  it  would  have  been  welcomed 
by  those  who  now  denounce  it  as  a  usurpation.  It  should  be 
kept  in  mind  that  each  of  the  departments  has  been  alternately 
in  and  out  of  favor,  and  that  changes  in  the  organization  of  them 
hastily  made,  particularly  in  accordance  with  the  vicissitudes 
of  party  ascendency,  would  produce  a  constitutional  instability 
worse  than  a  legislative  one. 

Another  innovation  of  great  practical  importance  espoused 
by  the  Senate,  relates  to  the  power  of  the  Executive  to  make 
diplomatic  and  consular  appointments  in  the  recess  of  the  Senate. 
Hitherto  it  has  been  the  practice  to  make  such  appointments  to 
places  calling  for  them,  whether  the  places  had  or  had  not  be- 
fore received  them.  Under  no  Administration  was  the  distinc- 
tion more  disregarded  than  under  that  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  particu- 
larly in  consular  appointments,  which  rest  on  the  same  text  of 
the  Constitution  with  that  of  public  ministers.  It  is  now  as- 
sumed that  the  appointments  can  only  be  made  for  occurring 
vacancies;  that  is,  places  which  had  been  previously  filled.    The 

vol.  iv.  24 


370  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

error  lies  in  confounding  foreign  missions  under  the  law  of  na- 
tions with  municipal  officers  under  the  local  law.  If  they  were 
officers  in  the  constitutional  sense,  a  legislative  creation  of  them 
being  expressly  required,  they  could  not  be  created  by  the  Presi- 
dent and  Senate.  If,  indeed,  it  could  be  admitted  that  as  offices 
they  would  ipso  facto  be  created  by  the  appointment  from  the 
President  and  Senate,  the  office  would  expire  with  the  appoint- 
ment, and  the  next  appointment  would  create  a  new  office,  not 
fill  a  vacant  one.  By  regarding  those  missions  not  as  offices, 
but  as  stations  or  agencies,  always  existing  under  the  law  of 
nations  for  governments  agreeing,  the  one  to  send  the  other  to 
receive  the  proper  functionaries,  the  case,  though  not  perhaps 
altogether  free  from  difficulty,  is  better  provided  for  than  by 
any  other  construction.  The  doctrine  of  the  Senate  would  be  as 
injurious  in  practice  as  it  is  unfounded  in  authority.  It  might 
and  probably  would  be  of  infinitely  greater  importance  to  send 
a  public  minister  where  one  had  never  been  sent,  than  where 
there  had  been  a  previous  mission.  If  regarded  as  offices,  it 
follows,  moreover,  that  the  President  would  be  bound,  as  in  case 
of  other  offices,  to  keep  them  always  filled,  whether  the  occa- 
sion required  it  or  not;  the  opposite  extreme  of  not  being  per- 
mitted to  provide  for  the  occasion,  however  urgent. 

The  new  doctrine  involves  a  difficulty  also  in  providing  for 
treaties,  even  treaties  of  peace,  on  favorable  emergencies,  the 
functionaries  not  being  officers  in  a  constitutional  sense,  nor 
perhaps  ministers  to  any  foreign  government.  An  attempt  was, 
I  believe,  made  by  a  distinguished  individual  to  derive  a  power 
in  the  President  to  provide  for  the  case  of  terminating  a  war, 
from  his  military  power  to  establish  a  truce.  This  would  have 
opened  a  wider  door  for  construction  than  has  yet  been  con- 
tended for. 

I  might  add  the  claim  for  the  Senate  of  a  right  to  be  consulted 
by  the  President,  and  to  give  their  advice  previous  to  his  foreign 
negotiations;  a  course  of  proceeding  which  I  believe  was  con- 
demned by  the  result  of  a  direct  or  analogous  experiment,  and 
which  it  was  presumed  would  not  again  be  revived.     That  the 


1834.  LETTERS.  371 

secrecy  generally  essential  in  such  negotiations  would  be  safe 
in  a  numerous  body,  however  individually  worthy  of  the  usual 
confidence,  would  be  little  short  of  a  miracle. 

If  you  call  for  proofs  of  the  reality  of  these  claims,  by  or  in 
behalf  of  the  Senate,  I  may  refer  to  their  equal  notoriety  with 
facts  on  which  you  rely,  and  to  a  greater  authenticity  than  those 
which  you  state  on  hearsay  only. 

I  have  thrown  together  these  remarks,  as  suggested  by  the 
one-sided  view  you  have  taken  of  subjects  which  ought  to  be 
viewed  on  both  sides,  whatever  be  the  decision  on  them.  It  is 
not  improbable  that  a  free  and  full  conversation  would  bring  us 
much  nearer  together  on  the  most  important  points  than  might 
be  inferred  from  our  correspondence  on  paper.  When  or  whether 
at  all  such  a  conversation  can  take  place,  will  depend  on  the 
movements  on  your  part,  and  contingencies  on  mine. 

In  the  meantime  I  beg  you  to  regard  the  present  desultory 
communication  in  the  same  confidential  light  with  the  former, 
and  to  be  assured  of  my  constant  affection,  and  my  best  wishes 
for  the  happy  life  of  which  you  have  so  flattering  a  prospect. 


TO    EDWARD    EVERETT. 

Montpellier,  October  22d,  1834. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  the  copy  of  your  eulogy  on  La 
Fayette;  and  though  obliged,  in  my  personal  condition,  to  read 
but  little  at  a  time,  have  gone  through  it,  and  with  great  pleas- 
ure, finding  a  reward  in  every  page  as  I  proceeded.  It  is  a  fine 
picture  finally  framed,  with  a  likeness  faithful  to  the  noble  origi- 
nal; the  more  noble  for  having  renounced  the  vain  title.  It 
cannot  fail  to  be  universally  admired. 

I  am  reminded  by  the  occasion  of  unpaid  thanks  for  interest- 
ing communications  received  from  your  kindness,  when  I  was 
unable  to  attend  to  them.  Among  them  was  the  speech  of  Mr. 
Binney,  who  appears  to  have  sustained,  throughout  the  session, 
the  hisrli  character  he  brought  into  it. 


372  .  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

Be  please  d  to  accept,  with  my  thanks  for  your  present  favor, 
the  arrears  referred  to;  and  with  both,  a  reassurance  of  my  cor- 
dial esteem  and  mv  best  wishes. 


TO   THE   NEW    ENGLAND    SOCIETY   IN   NEW   YORK. 

Dec"  20th,  1834. 
I  have  received,  fellow-citizens,  your  letter  inviting  me,  in  be- 
half of  the  New  England  Society  in  New  York,  to  a  dinner  on 
the  22d  instant,  their  anniversary  celebration  of  the  principles 
and  virtues  of  their  Pilgrim  Fathers.  The  obstacle  to  my  ac- 
ceptance of  the  invitation  being  insuperable,  I  can  only  express 
my  acknowledgments  for  the  kindness  and  politeness  which  dic- 
tated it. 

The  exalted  feelings  which  determined  the  Pilgrims  to  seek 
in  a  New  World,  through  the  perils  and  sufferings  to  be  en- 
countered, the  liberty,  religious  and  civil,  denied  them  in  the 
old;  and  the  fruits  of  their  heroic  virtues,  in  the  multiplied 
blessings  now  enjoyed  by  their  expanding  posterity,  cannot  fail 
to  inspire  admiration  and  gratitude. 

With  an  assurance  of  my  cordial  sympathy  in  these  senti- 
ments, I  tender  that  of  the  great  respect  and  good  wishes  which 
I  pray  may  also  be  accepted. 

To  Samuel  A.  Foot,  Samuel  F.  Tisdale, 

William  Burns,  Edmund  S.  Gould, 

Thomas  Fessenden,  Shepherd  Knapp, 

Joseph  Hoxie,  John  Cleaveland, 


J.  M.  Catlin, 


Committee  of  Arrangements. 


TO   DOCTOR   DANIEL   DRAKE. 

Montpellier,  Jan*  12,  1835. 

Dear  Sir, — The  copy  of  your  discourse  on  the  "History, 
character,  and  prospects  of  the  West,"  was  duly  received;  and 


1835.  LETTERS.  373 

I  have  read,  with  pleasure,  the  instructive  views  taken  of  its 
interesting  and  comprehensive  theme.  Should  the  youth  ad- 
dressed, and  their  successors,  follow  your  advice,  and  their  ex- 
ample be  elsewhere  imitated  in  noting  from  period  to  period 
the  progress  and  changes  of  our  country  under  the  aspects  ad- 
verted to,  the  materials  added  to  the  supplies  of  the  decennial 
census,  improved  as  that  may  be,  will  form  a  treasure  of  incal- 
culable value  to  the  Philosopher,  the  Law-giver,  and  the  Politi- 
cal Economist.  Our  history,  short  as  it  is,  has  already  disclosed 
great  errors  sanctioned  by  great  names,  in  political  science,  and 
it  may  be  expected  to  throw  new  lights  on  problems  still  to  be 
decided. 

The  "note"  at  the  end  of  the  discourse,  in  which  the  geo- 
graphical relations  of  the  States  are  delineated,  merits  particu- 
lar attention.  Hitherto  hasty  observers,  and  unfriendly  proph- 
ets, have  regarded  the  Union  as  too  frail  to  last,  and  to  be  split 
at  no  distant  day  into  the  two  great  divisions  of  East  and  West. 
It  is  gratifying  to  find  that  the  ties  of  interest  are  now  felt  by 
the  latter  not  less  than  the  former;  ties  that  are  daily  strength- 
ened by  the  improvements  made  by  art  in  the  facilities  of  bene- 
ficial intercourse.  The  positive  advantages  of  the  Union  would 
alone  endear  it  to  those  embraced  by  it;  but  it  ought  to  be  still 
more  endeared  by  the  consequences  of  disunion;  in  the  jealousies 
and  collisions  of  commerce;  in  the  border  wars,  pregnant  with 
others,  and  soon  to  be  engendered  by  animosities  between  the 
slaveholding  and  other  States;  in  the  higher  toned  Govern- 
ments, especially  in  the  Executive  branch;  in  the  military  es- 
tablishments provided  against  external  danger,  but  convertible 
also  into  instruments  of  domestic  usurpation;  in  the  augmenta- 
tions of  expense,  and  the  abridgment,  almost  to  the  exclusion, 
of  taxes  on  consumption  (the  least  unacceptable  to  the  people) 
by  the  facility  of  smuggling  among  communities  locally  related, 
as  would  be  the  case.  Add  to  all  these  the  prospect  of  entan- 
gling alliances  with  foreign  powers  multiplying  the  evils  of  in- 
ternal origin.  But  I  am  rambling  into  observations,  with  proof 
in  the  "Discourse"  before  me,  that,  however  just,  they  cannot 
be  needed. 


374  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

With  thr;  thanks,  sir,  which  T  owe  to  your  politeness  in  fa- 
voring me  with  it,  I  tender  my  respectful  and  cordial  saluta- 
tions. 


TO   HENRY   CLAY. 

31  January,  1835. 

Perceiving  that  I  am  indebted  to  you  for  a  copy  of  your  Re- 
port on  our  Relations  with  France,  I  beg  you  to  accept  this 
return  of  ray  thanks  for  it.  The  document  is  as  able  in  its  ex- 
ecution, as  it  is  laudable  in  its  object  of  avoiding  war  without 
incurring  dishonor. 

It  must  be  the  wish  of  all  that  the  issue  may  correspond  with 
the  object.  But  may  not  a  danger  of  rupture  lurk  under  the 
conflicting  grounds  taken  on  the  two  sides— that  taken  by  the 
Message  and  by  the  Report,  also,  in  a  softened  tone,  that  the 
Treaty  is  binding  on  France,  and  is  in  no  event  to  be  touched; 
and  the  ground  taken  or  likely  to  be  taken  by  France,  with 
feelings  roused  by  the  peremptory  alternative  of  compliance  or 
self-redress,  that  the  Treaty  is  not  binding  on  her,  appealing 
for  the  fact  to  the  structure  of  her  government,  which  all  na- 
tions treating  with  her  are  presumed  and  bound  to  understand. 

It  may  be  well  for  both  parties  if  France  should  have  yielded 
before  the  arrival  of  the  Message,  or  not  decided  before  that  of 
the  Report,  or,  at  least,  should  not  be  inflexible  in  rejecting  the 
terms  of  the  Treaty.  A  war  between  the  two  nations,  which 
may  cost  them  many  millions  for  a  stake  not  exceeding  a  few, 
would  be  an  occurrence  peculiarly  unpropitious  to  the  cause  of 
popular  representation,  in  the  present  crisis  of  the  political 
world. 

War  is  the  more  to  be  avoided,  if  it  can  be  done  without  in 
admissible  sacrifices,  as  a  maritime  war  to  which  the  United 
States  should  be  a  party,  and  Great  Britain  neutral,  has  no  as- 
pect which  is  not  of  an  ominous  cast.  Enforce  the  belligerent 
rights  of  search  and  seizure  against  British  ships,  and  it  would 
be  a  miracle  if  serious  collisions  did  not  ensue.     Allow  the  rule 


1835.  LETTERS.  375 

of  "free  ships,  free  goods,"  and  the  flag  covers  the  property 
[of]  France  and  enables  her  to  employ  all  her  naval  resources 
against  us.  The  tendency  of  the  new  rules  in  favor  of  the  neu- 
tral flag  is,  to  displace  the  mercantile  marine  of  nations  at  war 
by  neutral  substitutes;  and  to  confine  the  war  on  water,  as  on 
land,  to  the  regular  force;  a  revolution  friendly  to  humanity  as 
lessening  the  temptations  to  war  and  the  severity  of  its  opera- 
tions, but  giving  an  advantage  to  the  nations  which  keep  up 
large  navies  in  time  of  peace  over  nations  dispensing  with  them, 
or  compelling  the  latter  to  follow  the  burdensome  example. 
France  has  at  present  this  advantage  over  us  in  the  extent  of 
her  public  ships  now  or  that  may  be  immediately  brought  into 
service,  whilst  the  privilege  of  the  neutral  flag  would  deprive 
us  of  the  cheap  and  efficient  aid  of  privateers. 

I  do  not  relinquish  the  hope,  however,  that  these  views  of 
the  subject  will  be  obviated  by  amicable  and  honorable  adjust- 
ment. 

Should  the  course  of  your  movements  at  any  time  approach 
Montpelier,  I  need  not  express  the  pleasure  which  a  call  from 
you  would  give  to  Mrs.  Madison  and  myself. 


TO   C.   J.   INGERSOLL. 

February  12,  1835. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  favor  inclosing  a  copy  of 
your  "  View  of  the  Committee  powers  of  Congress." 

Without  entering  into  questions  which  may  grow  out  of  the 
twofold  character  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  as  a  Le- 
gislative and  a  Judicial  body,  your  observations  suggest  a  fuller 
investigation  and  more  accurate  definition  of  the  privileges  and 
authorities  of  the  several  departments  and  branches  of  our  Re- 
publican Governments  than  have  yet  been  bestowed  on  them. 
The  task  would  be  well  worthy  the  most  skilful  hands. 

With  my  thanks,  sir,  for  your  communication,  I  tender  my 
friendly  salutations  and  good  wishes. 


o76  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 


TO   M.    VAN   BUREN. 

J.  Madison,  with  his  respectful  compliments  to  Mr.  Van  Bu- 
ren,  returns  his  thanks  for  the  copy  of  Mr.  Adams's  Oration  on 
the  "  Life  and  character  of  La  Fayette."  It  is  a  signal  illus- 
tration of  the  powers  and  resources  of  the  Orator,  and  will  de- 
servedly aid  in  making  more  known  a  character  which  will  be 
the  more  admired  the  more  it  is  known. 
Montpellier,  Feb7  18,  1835. 


TO   JOHN   TRUMBULL. 

Maech  1,  1835. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  late  letter  in  the  "  New  York  Commercial 
Advertiser  "  having  referred  to  my  recollection  of  what  passed 
between  us  as  to  the  Revolutionary  subjects  for  the  paintings 
provided  for  by  Congress,  it  may  be  a  satisfaction  to  yourself 
for  me  to  say,  that  you  justly  inferred  from  it  that  the  omission 
of  the  battle  of  Bunker  Hill  in  the  final  selection  did  not  pro- 
ceed from  the  circumstance  that  it  was  not,  in  the  ordinary 
sense,  a  victory. 

The  general  impression  I  retain  of  what  occurred  in  making 
the  selection  is,  that  in  my  first  communication  with  those  offi- 
cially around  me,  the  battle  of  Bunker's  Hill  first  presented 
itself  for  consideration,  being  the  first  in  order  of  time,  and 
known  to  have  given  an  inspiring  pledge  of  what  might  be  ex- 
pected from  the  bravery  and  patriotism  of  the  American  people 
in  the  impending  struggle  for  their  liberties.  But  as  the  reso- 
lution of  Congress  limited  the  number  of  paintings  to  four,  and 
the  Declaration  of  Independence,  with  the  events  at  Saratoga 
and  York,  stood  forth  with  irresistible  claims,  that  at  Bunker's 
Hill  was  yielded  to  Washington's  resignation  of  his  commission 
as  a  spectacle  too  peculiarly  interesting,  whether  as  a  contrast 
to  the  military  usurpations  so  conspicuous  in  history,  or  as  a 
lesson  and  example  to  leaders  of  victorious  armies  who  aspire 
to  true  glory;  and  it  was  a  circumstance  agreeable  to  us  all  that 


1835.  LETTERS. 


377 


the  subjects  finally  adopted  had  been  the  choice  of  the  artist 
himself,  whose  pencil  had  been  chosen  for  the  execution  of 
them. 


TO   A.   G.   GANO   AND   A.   N.   RIDDLE,    COMMITTEE. 

Montpellier,  March  25,  1835. 

I  have  received,  fellow-citizens,  your  letter  of  the  13th  instant 
inviting  me  "  to  a  celebration  by  the  native  citizens  of  Ohio  of 
the  anniversary  of  her  first  settlement  in  1788." 

Having  now  reached  my  85th  year,  and  being  otherwise  en- 
feebled by  much  indisposition,  I  am  necessarily  deprived  of  the 
pleasure  of  accepting  the  invitation.  I  am  not  the  less  sensible, 
however,  of  what  I  owe  to  the  kind  spirit  and  flattering  terms 
in  which  it  is  offered.  Under  circumstances  permitting  me  to 
join  in  the  festive  scene,  I  should,  besides  the  gratification  of 
making  my  acknowledgments  in  person,  have  that,  also,  of  visit- 
ing a  highly  interesting  portion  of  our  country  which  would  be 
new  to  me,  and  of  witnessing  the  natural,  social,  and  political 
advantages  which  are  attracting  so  much  admiration.  Taking 
into  view  the  enterprise  which  planted  the  germ  of  a  flourishing 
State  in  a  savage  wilderness;  the  rapidity  of  its  growth  under 
the  nurturing  protection  of  the  Federal  Councils;  the  variety 
and  value  of  the  improvements  already  spread  over  it  at  the 
age  of  less  than  half  a  century,  and  the  prospect  of  an  expand- 
ing prosperity,  of  which  it  has  sufficient  pledges,  Ohio  may  be 
justly  regarded,  with  every  congratulation,  as  a  monument  of 
the  happy  agency  of  the  free  institutions  which  characterize  the 
political  system  of  the  United  States. 

I  pray  you  to  accept,  with  my  cordial  respects,  the  assurance 
of  my  best  wishes. 


378  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

TO   W.   A.   DUER. 

Montpelliee,  June  5th,  1835. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  April  25th,  and 
with  the  aid  of  a  friend  and  amanuensis,  have  made  out  the  fol- 
lowing answer : 

On  the  subject  of  Mr.  Pinckncy's  proposed  plan  of  a  Consti- 
tution, it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  plan  printed  in  the  Journal 
was  not  the  document  actually  presented  by  him  to  the  Conven- 
tion. That  document  was  no  otherwise  noticed  in  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Convention  than  by  a  reference  of  it,  with  Mr.  Ran- 
dolph's plan,  to  a  committee  of  the  whole,  and  afterwards  to  a 
committee  of  detail,  with  others;  and  not  being  found  among 
the  papers  left  with  President  Washington,  and  finally  depos- 
ited in  the  Department  of  State,  Mr.  Adams,  charged  with  the 
publication  of  them,  obtained  from  Mr.  Pinckney  the  document 
in  the  printed  Journals  as  a  copy  supplying  the  place  of  the 
missing  one.  In  this  there  must  be  error,  there  being  sufficient 
evidence,  even  on  the  face  of  the  Journals,  that  the  copy  sent 
to  Mr.  Adams  could  not  be  the  same  with  the  document  laid 
before  the  Convention.  Take,  for  example,  the  article  consti- 
tuting the  House  of  Representatives  the  corner-stone  of  the 
fabric,  the  identity,  even  verbal,  of  which,  with  the  adopted 
Constitution,  has  attracted  so  much  notice.  In  the  first  place, 
the  details  and  phraseology  of  the  Constitution  appear  to  have 
been  anticipated.  In  the  next  place,  it  appears  that  within  a 
few  days  after  Mr.  Pinckney  presented  his  plan  to  the  Conven- 
tion, he  moved  to  strike  out  from  the  resolution  of  Mr.  Randolph 
the  provision  for  the  election  of  the  House  of  Representatives 
by  the  people,  and  to  refer  the  choice  of  that  House  to  the 
Legislatures  of  the  States,  and  to  this  preference  it  appears  he 
adhered  in  the  subsequent  proceedings  of  the  Convention.  Other 
discrepancies  will  be  found  in  a  source  also  within  your  reach, 
in  a  pamphlet*  published  by  Mr.  Pinckney  soon  after  the  close 

*  Observations  on  the  plan  of  Government  submitted  to  the  Federal  Conven- 
tion on  the  28th  of  Ma}',  1787,  by  C.  Pinckney,  «fcc.  See  Select  Tracts,  vol.  2,  in 
the  Library  of  the  Historical  Society  of  New  York. 


1835.  L  E  T  T  E  R  S . 


379 


of  the  Convention,  in  which  he  refers  to  parts  of  his  plan  which 
are  at  variance  with  the  document  in  the  printed  Journal.  A 
friend  who  had  examined  and  compared  the  two  documents  has 
pointed  out  the  discrepancies  noted  below.*   Further  evidence* 

*  Discrepancies  noted  between  the  plan  of  Mr.  C.  Pinckney  as  furnished  by  him  tc 
Mr.  Adams,  and  the  plan  presented  to  the  Convention  as  described  in  his  pam- 
phlet. 

The  pamphlet  refers  to  the  following  provisions  which  are  not  found  in  the 
plan  furnished  to  Mr.  Adams  as  forming  a  part  of  the  plan  presented  to  the  Con- 
vention :  1.  The  Executive  term  of  service  7  years.  2.  A  council  of  revision.  3. 
A  power  to  convene  and  prorogue  the  Legislature.  4.  For  the  junction  or  divis- 
ion of  States.  5.  For  enforcing  the  attendance  of  members  of  the  Legislature. 
6.  For  securing  exclusive  right  of  authors  and  discoverers. 

The  plan,  according  to  the  pamphlet,  provided  for  the  appointment  of  all  offi- 
cers, except  judges  and  ministers,  by  the  Executive,  omitting  the  consent  of  the 
Senate  required  in  the  plan  sent  to  Mr.  Adams.  Article  numbered  9,  according 
to  the  pamphlet,  refers  the  decision  of  disputes  between  the  States  to  the  mode 
prescribed  under  the  Confederation.  Article  numbered  7,  in  the  plan  sent  to 
Mr.  Adams,  gives  to  the  Senate  the  regulating  of  the  mode.  There  is  no  numer- 
ical correspondence  between  the  articles  as  placed  in  the  plan  sent  to  Mr.  Adams, 
and  as  noted  in  the  pamphlet,  and  the  latter  refers  numerically  to  more  than  are 
contained  in  the  former. 

It  is  remarkable,  that  although  the  plan  furnished  to  Mr.  Adams  enumerates, 
with  such  close  resemblance  to  the  language  of  the  Constitution  as  adopted,  the 
following  provisions,  and  among  them  the  fundamental  article  relating  to  the 
constitution  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  they  are  unnoticed  in  his  observa- 
tions on  the  plan  of  Government  submitted  by  him  to  the  Convention,  while 
minor  provisions,  as  that  enforcing  the  attendance  of  members  of  the  Legislature, 
are  commented  on.  I  cite  the  following,  though  others  might  be  added  :  3.  To 
subdue  a  rebellion  in  any  State  on  application  of  its  Legislature.  2.  To  provide 
such  dock-yards  and  arsenals,  and  erect  such  fortifications,  as  may  be  necessary 
for  the  U.  States,  and  to  exercise  exclusive  jurisdiction  therein.  4.  To  establish 
post  and  military  roads.  5.  To  declare  the  punishment  of  treason,  which  shall 
consist  only  in  levying  war  against  the  United  States,  or  any  of  them,  or  in  ad- 
hering to  their  enemies.  No  person  shall  be  convicted  of  treason  but  by  the  tes- 
timony of  two  witnesses.  6.  No  tax  shall  be  laid  on  articles  exported  from  the 
States. 

(a)  1.  Election  by  the  people  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 

2.  The  Executive  veto  on  the  laws.    See  the  succeeding  numbers  as  above. 

|  Alluding  particularly  to  the  debates  in  the  Convention  and  the  letter  of  Mr. 
Pinckney  of  March  28th,  1789,  to  Mr.  Madison.  [This  note  not  included  in  the 
letter  sent  to  Mr.  Duer.] 

(a)  Not  improbably  unnoticed,  because  the  plan  presented  by  him  to  the  Convention  contained 
his  favourite  mode  of  electing  the  House  of  Representatives  by  the  State  Legislatures,  so  essentially 
different  from  that  of  an  election  by  the  people,  as  in  the  Constitution  recommended  for  adoption. 


380  WORKS     OF    MADISON.  1835. 

on  tills  subject,  not  within  your  own  reach,  must  await  a  future, 
perhaps  a  posthumous  disclosure. 

One  conjecture  explaining  the  phenomenon  has  been,  that 
Mr.  Pinckney  interwove  with  the  draught  sent  to  Mr.  Adams 
passages  as  agreed  to  in  the  Convention  in  the  progress  of  the 
work,  and  which,  after  a  lapse  of  more  than  thirty  years,  were 
not  separated  by  his  recollection. 

The  resolutions  of  Mr.  Randolph,  the  basis  on  which  the  de- 
liberations of  the  Convention  proceeded,  were  the  result  of  a 
consultation  among  the  Virginia  Deputies,  who  thought  it  pos- 
sible that,  as  Virginia  had  taken  so  leading  a  part*  in  reference 
to  the  Federal  Convention,  some  initiative  propositions  might 
be  expected  from  them.  They  were  understood  not  to  commit 
any  of  the  members  absolutely  or  definitively  on  the  tenor  of 
them.  The  resolutions  will  be  seen  to  present  the  characteristic 
provisions  and  features  of  a  Government  as  complete  (in  some 
respects,  perhaps,  more  so)  as  the  plan  of  Mr.  Pinckney,  though 
without  being  thrown  into  a  formal  shape.  The  moment,  indeed, 
a  real  Constitution  was  looked  for  as  a  substitute  for  the  Con- 
federacy, the  distribution  of  the  Government  into  the  usual  de- 
partments became  a  matter  of  course  with  all  who  speculated 
on  the  prospective  change,  and  the  form  of  general  resolutions 
was  adopted  as  the  most  convenient  for  discussion.  It  may  be 
observed,  that  in  reference  to  the  powers  to  be  given  to  the  Gen- 
eral Government  the  resolutions  comprehended  as  well  the  pow- 
ers contained  in  the  articles  of  Confederation,  without  enumer- 
ating them,  as  others  not  overlooked  in  the  resolutions,  but  left 
to  be  developed  and  defined  by  the  Convention. 

With  regard  to  the  plan  proposed  by  Mr.  Hamilton,  I  may 
say  to  you,  that  a  Constitution  such  as  you  describe  was  never 
proposed  in  the  Convention,  but  was  communicated  to  me  by 
him  at  the  close  of  it.  It  corresponds  with  the  outline  published 
in  the  Journal.   The  original  draught  being  in  possession  of  his 


*  Virginia  proposed,  in  178G,  the  Convention  at  Annapolis,  which  recommended 
the  Convention  at  Philadelphia,  of  17S7,  and  was  the  first  of  the  States  tlia.  acted 
on,  and  complied  with,  the  recommendation  from  Annapolis.  [This  note  nut  in- 
cluded in  the  letter  sent  to  Mr.  Duer.] 


1835.  LETTERS.  381 

family  and  their  property,  I  have  considered  any  publicity  of  it 
as  lying  with  them. 

Mr.  Yates's  notes,  as  you  observe,  are  very  inaccurate;  thej< 
are,  also,  in  some  respects,  grossly  erroneous.  The  desultory 
manner  in  which  he  took  them,  catching  sometimes  but  half  the 
language,  may,  in  part,  account  for  it.  Though  said  to  bo  a  re- 
spectable and  honorable  man,  he  brought  with  him  to  the  Con- 
vention the  strongest  prejudices  against  the  existence  and  ob- 
ject of  the  body,  in  which  he  was  strengthened  by  the  course 
taken  in  its  deliberations.  He  left  the  Convention,  also,  long 
before  the  opinions  and  views  of  many  members  were  finally  de- 
veloped into  their  practical  application.  The  passion  and  preju- 
dice of  Mr.  L.  Martin  betrayed  in  his  published  letter  could  not 
fail  to  discolour  his  representations.  He  also  left  the  Conven- 
tion before  the  completion  of  their  work.  I  have  heard,  but  will 
not  vouch  for  the  fact,  that  he  became  sensible  of,  and  admitted 
his  error.  Certain  it  is,  that  he  joined  the  party  who  favored 
the  Constitution  in  its  most  liberal  construction. 

I  can  add  little  to  what  I  have  already  said  in  relation  to  the 
agency  of  your  father  in  the  adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitu- 
tion. My  only  correspondence  with  him  was  a  short  one,  intro- 
duced by  a  letter  from  him  written  during  the  Convention  of 
New  York,  at  the  request  of  Mr.  Hamilton,  who  was  too  busy 
to  write  himself,  giving  and  requesting  information  as  to  the 
progress  of  the  Constitution  in  New  York  and  Virginia.  Of 
my  letter  or  letters  to  him  I  retain  no  copy.  The  two  letters 
from  him  being  short,  copies  of  them  will  be  sent  if  not  on  his 
files,  and  if  desired.  They  furnish  an  additional  proof  that  he 
was  an  ardent  friend  of  the  depending  Constitution. 

I  have  marked  this  letter  "confidential,"  and  wish  it  to  be 
considered  for  yourself  only.  In  my  present  condition,  enfeebled 
by  age  and  crippled  by  disease,  I  may  well  be  excused  for  wish- 
ing not  to  be  in  any  way  brought  to  public  view  on  subjects  in- 
volving considerations  of  a  delicate  nature.  I  thank  you,  sir, 
for  your  kind  sentiments  and  good  wishes,  and  pray  you  to  ac- 
cept a  sincere  return  of  them. 


382  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 


TO    W.    CRANCH,   FIRST  VICE    PRESIDENT    WASHINGTON   NATIONAL 
MONUMENT   SOCIETY,   WASHINGTON    CITY. 

July  25th,  1835. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  20th,  informing 
me  that  I  have  been  unanimously  elected  President  of  the  Wash- 
ington National  Monument  Society,  in  the  place  of  its  late  la- 
mented President,  Chief  Justice  Marshall. 

I  am  very  sensible  of  the  distinction  conferred  by  the  relations 
in  which  the  Society  has  placed  me,  and  feeling,  like  my  illustri- 
ous predecessor,  a  deep  interest  in  the  object  of  the  Association, 
I  cannot  withhold,  as  an  evidence  of  it,  the  acceptance  of  the 
appointment,  though  aware  that  in  my  actual  condition  it  can- 
not be  more  than  honorary,  and  that  under  no  circumstances  it 
could  supply  the  loss  which  the  Society  has  sustained. 

A  monument  worthy  of  the  memory  of  Washington,  reared 
by  the  means  proposed,  will  commemorate  at  the  same  time  a 
virtue,  a  patriotism,  and  a  gratitude  truly  national,  with  which 
the  friends  of  liberty  everywhere  will  sympathize,  and  of  which 
our  country  may  always  be  proud. 

I  tender  to  the  Society  tho  acknowledgments  due  from  me, 
and  to  yourself  the  assurance  of  my  high  and  cordial  esteem. 


TO    HUBBARD   TAYLOR. 

Montpkllier,  Aug.  15,  1835. 

DR  Sir, — Your  letter  of  July was  duly  received.     The 

recollections  it  so  kindly  expresses  are  very  gratifying,  coming 
from  one  whose  friendship  I  have  always  valued,  and  to  whom 
I  have  been  often  indebted  for  attentions  useful  to  me. 

I  join  in  all  your  good  wishes  for  more  tranquillity  and  har- 
mony in  our  public  affairs,  which  will  always  be  best  promoted 
by  a  course  avoiding  the  extremes  to  which  party  excitements 
are  liable.  But  a  sickly  countenance  occasionally  is  not  incon- 
sistent with  the  self-healing  capacity  of  a  constitution  such  as  I 
hope  ours  is,  and  still  less  with  the  medical  resources  in  the 


1835.  LETTERS.  383 

hands  of  a  people  such  as  I  hope  ours  will  prove  to  he.  As  long 
as  the  parts  composing  our  Union  are  faithful  to  it,  despair  ought 
never  to  be  indulged,  and  that  pledge  for  the  propitious  desti- 
nies of  our  country  may  be  relied  on  as  long  as  the  consequences 
of  disunion  are  sufficiently  anticipated.  There  are  ills  with 
which  such  a  catastrophe  is  pregnant,  that  cannot  escape  the 
most  short-sighted,  and  there  are  doubtless  others  beyond  the 
reach  of  the  most  prophetic  sagacity. 

I  am  glad  to  learn  that  you  enjoy  so  much  vigor  of  health,  at 
the  entrance  of  your  76th  year.  You  have  erred  in  supposing 
me  in  my  84th;  I  am  now  considerably  advanced  in  my  85th; 
to  the  infirmities  belonging  to  which  arc  added  inroads  on  my 
health,  which,  among  other  effects,  have  so  crippled  my  fingers 
as  to  oblige  me  to  avail  myself  of  borrowed  ones.  I  am,  how- 
ever, freed  from  the  most  painful  stages  of  the  rheumatic  cause, 
for  which,  as  for  other  blessings,  I  ought  to  be  thankful. 


TO    RICHARD    D.    CUTTS. 

Montpkllier,  Septr  12.  1835. 

Dear  Richard, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  5th  in- 
stant, in  which  you  request  my  advice  on  the  choice  of  a  pro- 
fession. 

Observing  your  decided  bias  in  favor  of  the  law,  and  not  dis- 
senting from  it,  I  need  only  express  the  pleasure  with  which 
I  find  you  so  determined  to  aim  at  success  by  distinguished 
qualifications  for  it.  You  will  be  apprized  by  better  counsellors 
than  I  am,  that  you  will  have  so  much  to  learn  after  your  arrival 
at  the  bar,  that  you  cannot  diminish  it  too  much  by  the  stock 
you  will  carry  with  you.  This,  at  all  times  commendable,  is 
particularly  enforced  by  the  present  condition  and  prospects  of 
our  country.  The  great  and  increasing  number  of  our  univer- 
sities, colleges,  and  academies,  and  other  seminaries,  are  already 
throwing  out  crops  of  educated  youth  beyond  the  demand  for 
them  in  the  professions  and  pursuits  requiring  such  preparations. 
[This]  is  likely  to  be  more  and  more  the  case,  giving  to  the  few 


384  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

only  who  distinguish  themselves  the  expected  rewards.  I  hope 
you  are  duly  sensible  of  the  value  of  the  studies  through  which 
you  have  just  passed,  and  of  the  expediency  of  keeping  them 
alive  by  a  collateral  and  incidental  cultivation  of  them.  Phi- 
losophy and  literature  are  always  a  recreation  and  improvement 
grateful  to  an  unvitiated  mind;  and  it  may  be  repeated,  with 
the  oracular  sanction  of  Cicero,  that  there  is  no  branch  of  knowl- 
edge which  may  not  be  involved  in  legal  questions,  or  made  to 
illustrate  or  embellish  forensic  discussions. 

Allow  me  to  close  this  brief  answer  to  your  letter,  dictated 
in  the  crippled  state  of  my  health,  with  the  affectionate  wish  that 
your  career  in  life,  whatever  it  may  be,  will  in  every  respect  be 
such  as  to  render  it  the  harbinger  of  a  better. 


TO   PRESIDENT  JACKSON. 

Montpellier,  October  11th,  1835. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  your  favor  of  the  7th,  with 
the  letter  and  medal  from  Mr.  Goddard  which  you  were  good 
enough  to  forward  under  your  cover. 

The  use  made  of  our  expressed  opinion  on  the  temperance 
subject  denotes  the  peculiar  zeal  with  which  its  patrons  are  in- 
spired. Should  ardent  spirits  be  everywhere  banished  from  the 
list  of  drinks,  it  will  be  a  revolution  not  the  least  remarkable 
in  this  revolutionary  age,  and  our  country  will  have  its  full  share 
in  that  as  in  other  merits. 

I  thank  you,  sir,  for  the  kind  interest  you  express  in  my  health. 
It  has  been  for  a  considerable  time  much  broken  by  chronic  com- 
plaints, which,  added  to  my  great  age,  have  reduced  me  to  a 
state  of  much  debility,  particularly  in  my  limbs. 

I  observed  with  pleasure  that  you  had  returned  from  your 
periodical  trip  to  the  Rip-Raps  with  the  salubrious  advantage 
promised  by  it. 

Mrs.  Madison  joins  me  in  a  return  of  your  good  wishes,  and 
we  pray  you  to  be  assured  of  the  sincerity  and  high  respect  with 
which  it  is  offered. 


1835.  LETTERS.  335 

TO    CHARLES   FRANCIS    ADAMS. 

MONTPKLLIER,   October   13,    1835 

Dear  Sir,— I  have  received  your  letter  of  September  30,  with 
a  copy  of  "An  Appeal"  from  the  new  to  the  old  Whigs.  The 
pamphlet  contains  very  able  and  interesting  views  of  its  subject. 

The  claims  for  the  Senate  of  a  share  in  the  removal  from  office, 
and  for  the  legislature  an  authority  to  regulate  its  tenure, 
have  had  powerful  advocates.  I  must  still  think,  however,  that 
the  text  of  the  Constitution  is  best  interpreted  Iry  reference  to 
the  tripartite  theory  of  government  to  which  practice  has  con- 
formed, and  which  so  long  and  uniform  a  practice  would  seem 
to  have  established. 

The  face  of  the  Constitution  and  the  journalized  proceedings 
of  the  Convention  strongly  indicate  a  partiality  to  that  theory, 
then  at  its  zenith  of  favor  among  the  most  distinguished  com- 
mentators on  the  organizations  of  political  power. 

The  right  of  suffrage,  the  rule  of  apportioning  representation, 
and  the  mode  of  appointing  to  and  removing  from  office,  are 
fundamentals  in  a  free  government,  and  ought  to  be  fixed  by  the 
Constitution.  If  alterable  by  the  legislature,  the  Government 
might  become  the  creator  of  the  Constitution  of  which  it  is  itself 
but  the  creature;  and  if  the  large  States  could  be  reconciled  to 
an  augmentation  of  power  in  the  Senate,  constructed  and  en- 
dowed as  that  branch  of  the  Government  is,  a  veto  on  removals 
from  office  would  at  all  times  be  worse  than  inconvenient  in  its 
operation,  and  in  party  times  might,  by  throwing  the  executive 
machinery  out  of  gear,  produce  a  calamitous  interregnum. 

In  making  these  remarks  I  am  not  unaware  that  in  a  country 
wide  and  expanding  as  ours  is,  and  in  the  anxiety  to  convey  in- 
formation to  the  door  of  every  citizen,  an  unforeseen  multipli- 
cation of  offices  may  add  a  weight  to  the  executive  scale,  dis- 
turbing the  equilibrium  of  the  Government.  I  should  therefore 
see  with  pleasure  a  guard  against  the  evil,  by  whatever  regula- 
tions having  that  effect  may  be  within  the  scope  of  legislative 
power;  or,  if  necessary,  even  by  an  amendment  of  the  Constitu- 

vol.  iv  25 


386  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

tion  when  a  lucid  interval  of  party  excitement  shall  invite  the 
experiment. 

With  my  thanks  for  your  friendly  communication  and  for  the 
interest  you  express  in  my  health,  which  is  much  broken  by 
chronic  complaints  added  to  my  great  age,  I  pray  you  to  accept 
the  assurance  of  my  respect  and  good  wishes. 


TO  CHARLES  J.   INGERSOLL. 

MONTPELLIER,  NOV*  S. 

DR  Sir, — I  thank  you  as  a  friend  for  the  printed  copy  of  your 
discourse  kindly  sent  me,  and  I  thank  you  still  more  as  a  citizen 
for  such  an  offering  to  the  free  institutions  of  our  country.  In 
testing  the  tree  of  liberty  by  its  fruits  you  have  shewn  how 
precious  it  ought  to  be  held  by  those  who  enjoy  the  blessing. 
I  wish  the  discourse  could  be  translated  and  circulated  wherever 
the  blessing  is  not  enjoyed.  Were  the  truths  it  contains  in  pos- 
session of  every  adult  in  Europe,  the  portentous  league  against 
the  rights  and  happiness  of  the  human  race  would  be  formidable 
only  to  its  authors  and  abettors. 


TO    ROBERT    H.   GOLDSBOROUOH. 

Montpkllier,  Decr  21,  1835. 

DR  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  15th,  with  the 
tobacco  seed  it  refers  to.  I  tender  the  thanks  due  respectively 
to  Mr.  Vaughan  and  yourself  for  the  obliging  attention  to  which 
I  am  indebted,  and  will  take  measures  for  turning  the  seed  to 
the  best  account. 

I  was  favored  many  years  ago  by  Col.  G.  Mason  with  a  sam- 
ple of  the  like  seed,  and  had  hills  enough  planted  from  it  to  test 
its  character  in  our  climate.  It  was  found  to  retain,  though 
not  entirely,  its  characteristic  fragrance;  but  it  was  so  inferior 


1835.  LETTERS.  387 

in  size  and  weight,  that,  with  the  idea  of  its  anticipated  degen- 
eracy, and  my  general  absence  from  home,  the  experiment  was 
not  continued.  It  certainly  merits  the  fuller  one  which  is  now 
promised  by  the  several  hands  into  which  the  seed  will  be 
committed;  especially  as  seed  from  the  Island  can  be  occasion- 
ally obtained  in  the  event  of  a  progressive  degeneracy.  It  is 
not  unworthy  of  consideration  that  the  extending  culture  of  the 
ordinary  tobacco  in  the  West  will  rapidly  glut  the  market  for 
that  of  Virginia  and  Maryland,  and  that  the  Cuba  tobacco 
may  succeed  better  in  these  States  than  in  the  Western  soils. 
I  have  been  informed  by  a  gentleman  who  has  resided  in  Cuba, 
and  took  notice  of  the  tobacco  crop,  that  it  there  requires  ;i 
particular  soil;  and,  as  is  said  of  your  finest  Maryland  tobacco, 
that  it  is  not  every  plant  or  even  every  leaf  of  the  same  plant 
that  will  possess  the  distinguished  quality. 

I  pray  you,  sir,  to  accept  for  yourself,  and  to  convey  to  Mr. 
Vaughan,  with  my  best  respects,  a  cordial  return  of  the  friendly 
sentiments  and  good  wishes  which  your  letter  expresses  on  the 
part  of  both. 


TO    CHARLES   J.    INGERSOLL. 

MONTPELLIER,  DeC  30th,    1835. 

Dear  Sir, — I  thank  you,  though  at  a  late  day,  for  the  pam- 
phlet comprising  your  address  at  New  York. 

The  address  is  distinguished  by  some  very  important  views 
of  an  important  subject. 

The  absolutists  on  the  "  Let  alone  theory"  overlook  the  two 
essential  prc-rcquisites  to  a  perfect  freedom  of  external  com- 
merce— 1.  That  it  be  universal  among  nations.  2.  That  peace 
be  perpetual  among  them. 

A  perfect  freedom  of  international  commerce,  manifestly  re- 
quires that  it  be  universal.  If  not  so,  a  nation  departing  from 
the  theory  might  regulate  the  commerce  of  a  nation  adhering 
to  it,  in  subserviency  to  its  own  interest,  and  disadvantageous! y 
to  the  latter.     In  the  case  of  navigation,  so  necessary  under 


388  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

different  aspects,  nothing  is  more  clear  than  that  a  discrimina- 
tion by  one  nation  in  favor  of  its  own  vessels,  without  an  equiv- 
alent discrimination  on  the  side  of  another,  must  at  once  banish 
from  the  intercourse  the  navigation  of  the  latter.  This  was 
verified  by  our  own  ante-Constitution  experience,  as  the  remedy 
for  it  has  been  by  the  post-Constitution  experience. 

Bui  to  a  perfect  freedom  of  commerce,  universality  is  not  the 
only  condition;  perpetual  peace  is  another.  War,  so  often  oc- 
curring,  and  so  liable  to  occur,  is  a  disturbing  incident  entering 
into  the  calculations  by  which  a  nation  ought  to  regulate  its 
foreign  commerce.  It  may  well  happen  to  a  nation  adhering 
strictly  to  the  rule  of  buying  cheap,  that  the  rise  of  prices  in 
nations  at  war  may  exceed  the  cost  of  a  protective  policy  in 
time  of  peace;  so  that,  taking  the  two  periods  together,  protec- 
tion would  be  cheapness.  On  this  point,  also,  an  appeal  may 
be  made  to  our  own  experience.  The  champions  for  the  "Let 
alone  policy"  forget  that  theories  arc  the  offspring  of  the  closet; 
exceptions  and  qualifications  the  lessons  of  experience. 


TO   THOMAS   GILMER   AND    OTHERS   OF   THE    COMMITTEE. 

I  have  received,  fellow-citizens,  your  letter  inviting  me,  in 
behalf  of  a  number  of  citizens  of  Albemarle,  to  partake  of  a 
public  dinner  on  the  approaching  4th  of  July. 

For  this  mark  of  their  kind  attention,  I  can  only  offer  an  ex- 
pression of  my  grateful  sensibility;  the  debility  of  age,  with  a 
continuance  of  much  indisposition,  rendering  it  impossible  for 
me  to  join  them  on  the  occasion. 

However  conscious  of  the  extent  in  which  the  partiality  of 
my  friends  has  overvalued  my  public  career,  I  may  be  allowed 
to  say  that  they  have  done  but  justice  in  supposing  that,  though 
abstracted  from  a  participation  in  public  affairs,  I  have  not 
ceased  to  feel  a  deep  interest  in  the  purity  and  permanence  of 
our  free  and  Republican  institutions,  characterized,  as  they  are, 
first,  by  a  division  of  the  powers  of  Government  between  the 
States  in  their  united  and  in  their  individual  capacities;  2d,  by 


1835.  LETTERS. 

defined  relation:-:  between  the  several  departments  and  branches 

of  Government.  Having  witnessed  the  defects  in  the  first  or- 
ganization of  the  Union  sufficiently  evinced  during  the  war  of 
the  Revolution,  and  still  further  developed  in  the  interval  be- 
tween its  termination  and  the  substitution  of  the  present  Con- 
stitution; having  witnessed,  also,  the  happy  fruits  of  the  latter, 
presenting  in  so  many  important  respects  a  contrast  to  the  pre- 
ceding state  of  tilings:  no  one  can  be  more  anxious  than  I  am 
that  its  permanent  success  be  ensured  by  a  faithful  adherence 
to  its  principles  and  objects. 

The  Committee,  in  making  the  respectful  acknowledgments 
due  from  me  for  the  favorable  and  affectionate  sentiments  com- 
municated in  their  letter,  will  please  to  accept  for  themselves 
an  assurance  of  my  high  esteem  and  cordial  regards. 


TO   THE   COMMITTEE — PEYTON,   GBYMES,   AND    OTHERS. 

I  have  received,  friends  and  fellow-citizens,  your  letter  of 
-inviting  me,  in  behalf  of  a  portion  of  the  Republican  citi- 


zens of  this  District,  to  a  public  dinner  to  be  given  to  John  M. 
Patton,  its  Representative  in  the  Congress  of  the  United  States. 

Gratified  as  I  should  be  in  meeting  so  many  of  my  neighbours 
and  friends,  among  them  the  able  and  highly  respected  Repre- 
sentative of  the  District,  the  opportunity  is  rendered  of  no 
avail  to  me  by  a  continuance,  and  of  late  increase  of  the  causes 
which  have  long  confined  me  to  my  home,  and  at  this  time  con- 
fines me  for  the  most  part  to  a  sick  chamber. 

The  favorable  views  which  my  friends  have  taken  of  my 
public  and  private  life  justly  demand  my  grateful  and  af- 
fectionate acknowledgments.  Such  a  testimony  from  those 
whom  I  know  to  be  sincere,  and  to  whom  I  am  best  known,  is 
very  precious  to  me.  If  it  gives  me  a  credit  far  beyond  my 
claims,  which  I  am  very  conscious  that  it  does,  I  cannot  be  in- 
sensible to  the  partiality  which  commits  the  error. 

Though  withdrawn  from  the  theatre  of  public  affairs,  and 
from  the  excitements  incident  to  them,  I  may  be  permitted  to 


390  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

say  to  my  friends  that  I  join  them  most  cordially  in  their  devo- 
tion to  the  great  and  fundamental  principles  of  Republicanism, 
to  which  Virginia  has  been  constant;  and  that  I  am  not  less 
persuaded  than  they  are  of  the  dependence  of  our  prosperity  on 
those  principles,  and  of  the  ultimate  connextion  of  both  with 
the  preservation  of  the  Union  in  its  integrity,  and  of  the  Con- 
stitution in  its  purity.  The  value  of  the  Union  will  be  most 
felt  by  those  who  look  with  most  forecast  into  the  consequences 
of  disunion.  Nor  will  the  Constitution,  with  its  wise  provis- 
ions for  its  improvement  under  the  lights  of  experience,  be  un- 
dervalued by  any  who  compare  the  distracted  and  ominous 
condition  from  which  it  rescued  the  country,  witli  the  security 
and  prosperity  so  long  enjoyed  under  it,  with  the  bright  pros- 
pects which  it  has  opened  on  the  civilized  world.  It  is  a  proud 
reflection  for  the  people  of  the  United  States,  proud  for  the 
cause  of  liberty,  that  history  furnishes  no  example  of  a  Govern- 
ment producing  like  blessings  in  an  equal  degree,  and  for  the 
same  period,  as  the  modification  of  political  power  in  the  com- 
pound Government  of  the  U.  States,  of  which  the  vital  princi- 
ple pervading  the  whole  and  all  its  parts  is  the  elective  and  re- 
sponsible principle  of  Republicanism.  May  not  esto  jperpetua 
express  the  hopes  as  well  as  the  prayer  of  every  citizen  who 
loves  liberty  and  loves  his  country? 

I  pray  the  committee,  in  communicating  my  thanks  to  the 
meeting  for  the  kind  invitation  conveyed  to  me,  to  accept  for 
themselves  my  cordial  respects  and  best  wishes. 


Sovereignty. 

1835. 

It  has  hitherto  been  understood  that  the  supreme  power,  that 
is,  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  of  the  States,  was  in  its  nature 
divisible,  and  was,  in  fact,  divided,  according  to  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  between  the  States  in  their  united  and 
the  States  in  their  individual  capacities,  and  so  viewed  by  the 
Convention  in  transmitting  the  Constitution  to  the  Congress  of 


1835.  SOVEREIGNTY. 


391 


the  Confederation ;  so  viewed  and  called  in  official,  in  contro- 
versial, and  in  popular  language;  that  as  the  States,  in  their 
highest  sovereign  character,  were  competent  to  surrender  the 
whole  sovereignty  and  form  themselves  into  a  consolidated  State, 
so  they  might  surrender  a  part  and  retain,  as  they  have  done,  the 
other  part,  forming  a  mixed  Government,  with  a  division  of  its 
attributes  as  marked  out  in  the  Constitution. 

Of  late,  another  doctrine  has  occurred,  which  supposes  that 
sovereignty  is  in  its  nature  indivisible;  that  the  societies  denom- 
inated States,  in  forming  the  constitutional  compact  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  acted  as  indivisible  sovereignties,  and,  consequently, 
that  the  sovereignty  of  each  remains  as  absolute  and  entire  as 
it  was  then,  or  could  be  at  any  time;  and  it  is  contended  by  some 
that  it  renders  the  States  individually  the  paramount  expositors 
of  the  true  meaning  of  the  Constitution  itself. 

This  discord  of  opinions  arises  from  a  propensity  in  many  to 
prefer  the  use  of  theoretical  guides  and  technical  language  to 
the  division  and  depositories  of  political  power,  as  laid  down 
in  the  constitutional  charter,  which  expressly  assigns  certain 
powers  of  Government,  which  are  the  attributes  of  sovereignty 
to  the  United  States,  and  even  declares  a  practical  supremacy 
of  them  over  the  powers  reserved  to  the  States,  a  supremacy 
essentially  involving  that  of  exposition  as  well  as  of  execution; 
for  a  law  could  not  be  supreme  in  one  depository  of  power  if 
the  final  exposition  of  it  belonged  to  another. 

In  settling  the  question  between  these  rival  claims  of  power, 
it  is  proper  to  keep  in  mind  that  all  power  in  just  and  free  gov- 
ernments is  derived  from  compact;  that  when  the  parties  to  the 
compact  are  competent  to  make  it,  and  when  the  compact  creates 
a  government,  and  arms  it  not  only  with  a  moral  power,  but  the 
physical  means  of  executing  it,  it  is  immaterial  by  what  name 
it  is  called.  Its  real  character  is  to  be  decided  by  the  compact 
itself;  by  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  powers  it  specifies,  and 
the  obligations  imposed  on  the  parties  to  it. 

As  a  ground  of  compromise,  let,  then,  the  advocates  of  State 
rights  acknowledge  this  rule  of  measuring  the  Federal  share  of 
sovereign  power  under  the  constitutional  compact;  and  let  it  be 


392  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

conceded,  on  tlie  other  hand,  that  the  States  are  not  deprived 
by  it  of  that  corporate  existence  and  political  unity  which  would, 
in  the  event  of  a  dissolution,  voluntary  or  violent,  of  the  Con- 
stitution, replace  them  in  the  condition  of  separate  communities, 
that  being  the  condition  in  which  they  entered  into  the  com- 
pact.    (See  letter  to  Mr.  Webster,  March  15,  1833.) 

At  the  period  of  our  Revolution  it  was  supposed  by  some  that 
it  dissolved  the  social  compact  within  the  Colonies,  and  pro- 
duced a  State  of  nature  which  required  a  naturalization  of  those 
who  had  not  participated  in  the  Revolution.  The  question  was 
brought  before  Congress  at  its  first  session  by  Doctor  Ramsay, 
Avho  contested  the  election  of  William  Smith:  who,  though  born 
in  South  Carolina,  had  been  absent  at  the  date  of  independence. 
The  decision  was,  that  his  birth  in  the  Colony  made  him  a  mem- 
ber of  the  society  in  its  new  as  well  as  its  original  state. 

To  go  to  the  bottom  of  the  subject,  let  us  consult  the  theory 
which  contemplates  a  certain  number  of  individuals  as  meeting 
and  agreeing  to  form  one  political  society,  in  order  that  the 
rights,  the  safety,  and  the  interest  of  each  may  be  under  the  safe- 
guard of  the  whole. 

The  first  supposition  is,  that  each  individual  being  previously 
independent  of  the  others,  the  compact  which  is  to  make  them 
one  society  must  result  from  the  free  consent  of  every  individ- 
ual. 

But  as  the  objects  in  view  could  not  be  attained  if  every  meas- 
ure conducive  to  them  required  the  consent  of  every  member  of 
the  society,  the  theory  farther  supposes,  either  that  it  was  a 
part  of  the  original  compact,  that  the  will  of  the  majority  was 
to  be  deemed  the  will  of  the  whole,  or  that  this  was  a  law  of 
nature,  resulting  from  the  nature  of  political  society  itself,  the 
offspring  of  the  natural  wants  of  man. 

Whatever  be  the  hypothesis  of  the  origin  of  the  lex  rnajoris 
2Kirtis,  it  is  evident  that  it  operates  as  a  plenary  substitute  of 
the  will  of  the  majority  of  the  society  for  the  will  of  the  whole 
society;  and  that  the  sovereignty  of  the  society,  as  vested  in  and 
exercisable  by  the  majority,  may  do  anything  that  could  be 
rightfully  done  by  the  unanimous  concurrence  of  the  members; 


1835.  SOVEREIGNTY.  393 

the  reserved  rights  of  individuals  (conscience,  for  example)  in 
becoming  parties  to  the  original  compact  being  beyond  the  le- 
gitimate reach  of  sovereignty,  wherever  vested  or  however 
viewed. 

The  question  then  presents  itself,  how  far  the  will  of  a  ma- 
jority of  the  society,  by  virtue  of  its  identity  with  the  will  of  the 
society,  can  divide,  modify,  or  dispose  of  the  sovereignty  of  the 
society;  and  quitting  the  theoretic  guide,  a  more  satisfactory 
one  will  perhaps  be  found — 1,  In  what  a  majority  of  a  society 
has  done,  and  been  universally  regarded  as  having  had  a  right 
to  do;  2,  What  it  is  universally  admitted  that  a  majority,  by 
virtue  of  its  sovereignty,  might  do,  if  it  chose  to  do. 

1.  The  majority  has  not  only  naturalized,  admitted  into  social 
compact  again,  but  has  divided  the  sovereignty  of  the  society 
by  actually  dividing  the  society  itself  into  distinct  societies 
equally  sovereign.  Of  this  operation  we  have  before  us  examples 
in  the  separation  of  Kentucky  from  Virginia  and  of  Maine  from 
Massachusetts;  events  which  were  never  supposed  to  require  a 
unanimous  consent  of  the  individuals  concerned. 

In  the  case  of  naturalization,  a  new  member  is  added  to  the 
social  compact,  not  only  without  a  unanimous  consent  of  the 
members,  but  by  a  majority  of  the  governing  body,  deriving  its 
powers  from  a  majority  of  the  individual  parties  to  the  social 
compact. 

2.  As,  in  those  cases  just  mentioned,  one  sovereignty  was 
divided  into  two  by  dividing  one  State  into  two  States;  so  it 
will  not  be  denied  that  two  States  equally  sovereign  might  be 
incorporated  into  one  by  the  voluntary  and  joint  act  of  majori- 
ties only  in  each.  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  has 
itseif  provided  for  such  a  contingency.  And  if  two  States  could 
thus  incorporate  themselves  into  one  by  a  mutual  surrender  of 
the  entire  sovereignty  of  each,  why  might  not  a  partial  incor- 
poration, by  a  partial  surrender  of  sovereignty,  be  equalty  prac- 
ticable if  equally  eligible?  and  if  this  could  be  done  by  two 
States,  why  not  by  twenty  or  more? 

A  division  of  sovereignty  is  in  fact  illustrated  by  the  exchange 
of  sovereign  rights  often  involved  in  treaties  between  independ- 


394  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835. 

ent  nations,  and  still  more  in  the  several  confederacies  which 
have  existed,  and  particularly  in  that  which  preceded  the  present 
Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

Certain  it  is  that  the  constitutional  compact  of  the  United 
States  has  allotted  the  supreme  power  of  government  partly  to 
the  United  States  by  special  grants,  partly  to  the  individual 
States  by  general  reservations;  and  if  sovereignty  be  in  its 
nature  divisible,  the  true  question  to  be  decided  is,  whether  the 
allotment  has  been  made  by  the  competent  authority;  and  this 
question  is  answered  by  the  fact  that  it  was  an  act  of  the  ma- 
jority of  the  people  in  each  State  in  their  highest  sovereign  ca. 
pacity,  equipollent  to  a  unanimous  act  of  the  people  composing 
the  State  in  that  capacity. 

It  is  so  difficult  to  argue  intelligibly  concerning  the  compound 
system  of  government  in  the  United  States,  without  admitting 
the  divisibility  of  sovereignty,  that  the  idea  of  sovereignty,  as 
divided  between  the  Union  and  the  members  composing  the 
Union,  forces  itself  into  the  view,  and  even  into  the  language 
of  those  most  strenuously  contending  for  the  unity  and  indivisi- 
bility of  the  moral  being  created  by  the  social  compact.  "For 
security  against  oppression  from  abroad  we  look  to  the  sover- 
eign power  of  the  United  States  to  be  exerted  according  to  the 
compact  of  union;  for  security  against  oppression  from  within, 
or  domestic  oppression,  we  look  to  the  sovereign  power  of  the 
State.  Now  all  sovereigns  are  equal;  the  sovereignty  of  the 
State  is  equal  to  that  of  the  Union,  for  the  sovereignty  of  each 
is  but  a  moral  person.  That  of  the  State  and  that  of  the  Union 
are  each  a  moral  person,  and  in  that  respect  precisely  equal." 
These  are  the  words  in  a  speech  which,  more  than  any  other,  has 
analyzed  and  elaborated  this  particular  subject,  and  they  ex- 
press the  view  of  it  finally  taken  by  the  speaker*  notwithstand- 
ing the  previous  one  in  which  he  says,  "  the  States,  while  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  was  forming,  were  not  shorn 
of  any  of  their  sovereign  power  by  that  process."t 

*  Mr.  Rowan,  of  Kentucky. 

f  See  U.  S.  Telegraph,  March  22,  23,  1830,  and  in  the  Richmond  Enquirer  of 
April  13,  16,  20,  23.  1830. 


1835-'6  NULLIFICATION. 


395 


That  a  sovereignty  would  be  lost  and  converted  into  a  vas 
salage  if  subjected  to  a  foreign  sovereignty  over  which  it  had 
no  control  and  in  which  it  had  no  participation,  is  clear  and 
certain;  but  far  otherwise  is  a  surrender  of  portions  of  sover- 
eignty by  compacts  among  sovereign  communities,  making  the 
surrenders  equal  and  reciprocal,  and  of  course  giving  to  each  as 
much  as  is  taken  from  it. 

Of  all  free  governments  compact  is  the  basis  and  the  essence, 
and  it  is  fortunate  that  the  powers  of  government,  supreme  as 
well  as  subordinate,  can  be  so  moulded  and  distributed,  so  com- 
pounded and  divided  by  those  on  whom  they  are  to  operate,  as 
will  be  most  suitable  to  their  conditions,  will  best  guard  their 
freedom,  and  best  provide  for  their  safety  and  happiness. 


On  Nullification. 

1835-6. 

Although  the  Legislature  of  Virginia  declared,  at  a  late  ses- 
sion, almost  unanimously,  that  South  Carolina  was  not  sup- 
ported in  her  doctrine  of  nullification  by  the  resolutions  of  1798, 
it  appears  that  those  resolutions  are  still  appealed  to  as  ex- 
pressly or  constructively  favoring  the  doctrine. 

That  the  doctrine  of  nullification  may  be  clearly  understood, 
it  must  be  taken  as  laid  down  in  the  report  of  a  special  commit- 
tee of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  South  Carolina  in  the 
year  1828.  In  that  document  it  is  asserted  that  a  single  State 
has  a  constitutional  right  to  arrest  the  execution  of  a  law  of  the 
United  States  within  its  limits;  that  the  arrest  is  to  be  pre- 
sumed right  and  valid,  and  is  to  remain  in  force,  unless  three- 
fourths  of  the  States,  in  a  convention,  should  otherwise  decide. 

The  forbidding  aspect  of  a  naked  creed,  according  to  which 
a  process  instituted  by  a  single  State  is  to  terminate  in  the  as- 
cendency of  a  minority  of  seven  over  a  majority  of  seventeen, 
has  led  its  partisans  to  disguise  its  deformity  under  the  position 
that  a  single  State  may  rightfully  resist  an  unconstitutional  and 
tyrannical  law  of  the  United  States;  keeping  out  of  view  the 


396  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833-6. 

essential  distinction  between  a  constitutional  right  and  the  natu- 
ral and  universal  right  of  resisting  intolerable  oppression.  But 
the  true  question  is,  whether  a  single  State  has  a  constitutional 
right  to  annul  or  suspend  the  operation  of  a  law  of  the  United 
States  within  its  limits,  the  State  remaining  a  member  of  the 
Union,  and  admitting  the  Constitution  to  be  in  force. 

With  a  like  policy  the  nullifiers  pass  over  the  state  of  things 
at  the  date  of  the  proceedings  of  Virginia,  and  the  particular 
doctrines  and  arguments  to  which  they  were  opposed,  without 
an  attention  to  which  the  proceedings  in  this,  as  in  other  cases, 
may  be  insecure  against  perverted  construction. 

It  must  be  remarked,  also,  that  the  champions  of  nullification 
attach  themselves  exclusively  to  the  third  resolution,  averting 
their  attention  from  the  seventh  resolution,  which  ought  to  be 
coupled  with  it,  and  from  the  report,  also,  which  comments  on 
both,  and  gives  a  full  view  of  the  object  of  the  Legislature  on 
the  occasion. 

Recurring  to  the  epoch  of  the  proceedings,  the  facts  of  the 
case  are,  that  Congress  had  passed  certain  acts  bearing  the 
name  of  the  alien  and  sedition  laws,  which  Virginia  and  some 
of  the  other  States  regarded  as  not  only  dangerous  in  their  ten- 
dency but  unconstitutional  in  their  text,  and  as  calling  for  a  re- 
medial interposition  of  the  States.  It  was  found,  also,  that  not 
only  was  the  constitutionality  of  the  acts  vindicated  by  a  pre- 
dominant party,  but  that  the  principle  was  asserted  at  the  same 
time  that  a  sanction  to  the  acts  given  by  the  supreme  judicial 
authority  of  the  United  States  was  a  bar  to  any  interposition 
whatever  on  the  part  of  the  States,  even  in  the  form  of  a  legis- 
lative declaration  that  the  acts  in  question  were  unconstitutional. 

Under  these  circumstances  the  subject  was  taken  up  by  Vir- 
ginia in  her  resolutions,  and  pursued  at  the  ensuing  session  of 
the  Legislature  in  a  comment  explaining  and  justifying  them,  her 
main  and  immediate  object  evidently  being  to  produce  a  convic- 
tion everywhere  that  the  Constitution  had  been  violated  by  the 
obnoxious  acts,  and  to  produce^a  concurrence  and  co-operation 
of  the  other  States  in  effectuating  a  repeal  of  the  acts.  She 
accordingly  asserted,  and  offered  her  proofs  at  great  length, 


1835-:6.  NULLIFICATION.  397 

that  the  acts  were  unconstitutional.  Siie  assorted,  moreover, 
and  offered  her  proofs,  that  the  States  had  a  right  in  Buch  ca 
to  interpose,  first  in  their  constituent  character,  to  which  the 
Government  of  the  United  .States  was  responsible,  and  other 
wise  as  specially  provided  by  the  Constitution;  and  farther,  that 
the  States,  in  their  capacity  of  parties  to  and  creators  of  the 
Constitution,  had  an  ulterior  right  to  interpose,  notwithstand- 
ing any  decision  of  a  constituted  authority,  which,  however  it 
might  be  the  last  resort  under  the  forms  of  the  Constitution  in 
cases  falling  within  the  scope  of  its  functions,  could  not  preclude 
an  interposition  of  the  States  as  the  parties  which  made  the  Con- 
stitution, and  as  such  possessed  an  authority  paramount  to  it. 

In  this  view  of  the  subject  there  is  nothing  which  excludes  a 
natural  right  in  the  States  individually,  more  than  in  any  por- 
tion of  an  individual  State  suffering  under  palpable  and  insup- 
portable wrongs,  from  seeking  relief  by  resistence  and  revolu- 
tion. 

But  it  follows  from  no  view  of  the  subject  that  a  nullification 
of  a  law  of  the  United  States  can,  as  is  now  contended,  belong 
rightfully  to  a  single  State  as  one  of  the  parties  to  the  Consti- 
tution, the  State  not  ceasing  to  avow  its  adherence  to  the  Con- 
stitution. A  plainer  contradiction  in  terms,  or  a  more  fatal 
inlet  to  anarchy,  cannot  be  imagined. 

And  what  is  the  text  in  the  proceedings  of  Virginia  which 
this  spurious  doctrine  of  nullification  claims  for  its  patronage? 
It  is  found  in  the  third  of  the  resolutions  of  1798,  which  is  in 
the  following  words : 

"  That  in  case  of  a  deliberate,  a  palpable,  and  dangerous  exer- 
cise of  powers  not  granted  by  the  [constitutional]  compact,  the 
States  who  are  parties  thereto  have  a  right  and  are  in  duty 
bound  to  interpose  for  arresting  the  progress  of  the  evil,  and  for 
maintaining  within  their  respective  limits  the  authorities,  rights, 
and  liberties  appertaining  to  them." 

Now  is  there  anything  here  from  which  a  single  State  can  in- 
fer a  right  to  arrest  or  annul  an  act  of  the  General  Government 
which  it  may  deem  unconstitutional?  So  far  from  it,  tliat  the 
obvious  and  proper  inference  precludes  such  a  right  on  the  part 


398  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1833-6. 

of  a  single  State,  the  plural  number  being  used  in  every  appli- 
cation of  the  term. 

In  the  next  place,  the  course  and  scope  of  the  reasoning  re- 
quires that  by  the  rightful  authority  to  interpose  in  the  cases 
and  for  the  purposes  referred  to,  was  meant  not  the  authority 
of  the  States  singly  and  separately,  but  their  authority  as  the 
parties  to  the  Constitution;  the  authority  which,  in  fact,  made 
the  Constitution;  the  authority  which,  being  paramount  to  the 
Constitution,  was  paramount  to  the  authorities  constituted  by 
it;  to  the  judiciary  as  well  as  the  other  authorities.  The  reso- 
lution derives  the  asserted  right  of  interposition  for  arresting 
the  progress  of  usurpations  by  the  Federal  Government  from 
the  fact  that  its  powers  were  limited  to  the  grant  made  by  the 
States;  a  grant  certainly  not  made  by  a  single  party  to  the  grant, 
but  by  the  parties  to  the  compact  containing  the  grant.  The 
mode  of  their  interposition,  in  extraordinary  cases,  is  left  by  the 
resolution  to  the  parties  themselves,  as  the  mode  of  interposition 
lies  with  the  parties  to  other  constitutions,  in  the  event  of  usur- 
pations of  power  not  remediable  in  the  forms  and  by  the  means 
provided  by  the  Constitution.  If  it  be  asked  why  a  claim  by  a 
single  party  to  the  constitutional  compact  to  arrest  a  law, 
deemed  by  it  a  breach  of  the  compact,  was  not  expressly  guarded 
against,  the  simple  answer  is  sufficient,  that  a  pretension  so 
novel,  so  anomalous,  and  so  anarchical,  was  not  and  could  not 
be  anticipated. 

In  the  third  place,  the  nullifying  claim  for  a  single  State  is 
probably  irreconcilable  with  the  effect  contemplated  by  the  in- 
terposition claimed  by  the  resolution  for  the  parties  to  the  Con- 
stitution, namely,  that  of  "maintaining  within  the  respective 
limits  of  the  States  the  authorities,  rights,  and  liberties  apper- 
taining to  them."  Nothing  can  be  more  clear  than  that  these 
authorities,  &c,  &c,  of  the  States — in  other  words,  the  authority 
and  laws  of  the  United  States — must  be  the  same  in  all;  or  this 
cannot  continue  to  be  the  case  if  there  be  a  right  in  each  to  an- 
nul or  suspend  within  itself  the  operation  of  the  laws  and  au- 
thority of  the  whole.  There  cannot  be  different  laws  in  differ- 
ent States  on  subjects  Within  the  compact,  without  subverting 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION. 


300 


its  fundamental  principles  and  rendering  it  as  abortive  in  prac- 
tice as  it  would  be  incongruous  in  theory.  A  concurrence  and 
co-operation  of  the  States  in  favour  of  eacli  would  have  the  effect 
of  preserving  the  necessary  uniformity  in  all,  which  I  he  Consti- 
tution so  carefully  and  so  specifically  provided  for  in  cases  where 
the  rule  might  be  in  most  danger  of  being  violated.  Thus  the 
citizens  of  every  State  are  to  enjoy  reciprocally  the  privileges 
of  citizens  in  every  other  State.  Direct  taxes  are  to  be  appor- 
tioned on  all  according  to  a  fixed  rule.  Judicial  taxes  arc  to 
be  the  same  in  all  the  States.  The  duties  on  imports  are  to  be 
uniform.  No  preference  is  to  be  given  to  the  ports  of  one  State 
over  those  of  another.  Can  it  be  believed,  with  these  pro- 
visions of  the  Constitution  illustrating  its  vital  principles  fully 
in  view  of  the  Legislature  of  Virginia,  that  its  members  could, 
in  the  resolution  quoted,  intend  to  countenance  a  right  in  a  sin- 
gle State  to  distinguish  itself  from  its  co-States,  by  avoiding  the 
burdens  or  restrictions  borne  by  them,  or  indirectly  giving  the 
law  to  them? 

These  startling  consequences  from  the  nullifying  doctrine 
have  driven  its  partisans  to  the  extravagant  presumption  that 
no  State  would  ever  be  so  unreasonable,  unjust,  and  impolitic, 
as  to  avail  itself  of  its  right  in  any  case  not  so  palpably  just  and 
fair  as  to  ensure  a  concurrence  of  the  others,  or,  at  least,  the 
requisite  proportion  of  them. 

Omitting  the  obvious  remark,  that  in  such  a  case  the  law 
would  never  have  been  passed  or  immediately  repealed,  and  the 
surprise  that  such  a  defence  of  the  nullifying  right  should  come 
from  South  Carolina,  in  the  teeth  and  at  the  time  of  her  own 
example,  the  presumption  of  such  a  forbearance  in  each  of  the 
States,  or  such  a  pliability  in  all,  among  twenty  or  thirty  inde- 
pendent sovereignties,  must  be  regarded  as  a  mockery  by  those 
who  reflect  for  a  moment  on  the  human  character,  or  consult  the 
lessons  of  experience;  not  the  experience  only  of  other  countries 
and  times,  but  that  among  ourselves;  and  not  only  under  the 
former  defective  Confederation,  but  since  the  improved  system 
took  place  of  it.  Examples  of  differences,  persevering  differ- 
ences among  the  States  on  the  constitutionality  of  Federal  acts, 


400  WORKS    OF    MAD  J  SON.  1835-'6. 

will  readily  occur  to  every  one;  and  which  would,  ere  this,  have 
defaced  and  demolished  Hie  Union,  had  the  nullifying  claim  of 
South  Carolina  been  indiscriminately  exercisable.  In  some  of 
the  States  the  carriage  tax  would  have  been  collected;  in  others, 
unpaid.  In  some,  the  tariff  on  imports  would  be  collected;  in 
others,  openly  resisted.  In  some,  light-houses  would  be  estab- 
lished; in  others,  denounced.  In  some  States  there  might  be 
war  with  a  foreign  power;  in  others,  peace  and  commerce. 
Finally,  the  appellate  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  would  give  effect  to  the  Federal  laws  in  some 
States,  while  in  others  they  would  be  rendered  nullities  by  the 
State  judiciaries.  In  a  word,  the  nullifying  claims,  if  reduced 
to  practice,  instead  of  being  the  conservative  principle  of  the 
Constitution,  would  necessarily,  and,  it  may  be  said,  obviously 
be  a  deadly  poison. 

Thus,  from  the  third  resolution  itself,  whether  regard  be  had 
to  the  employment  of  the  term  States  in  the  plural  number,  or 
the  argumentative  use  of  it,  or  to  the  object,  namely,  the  "  main- 
taining the  authority  and  rights  of  each,"  which  must  be  the 
same  in  all  as  in  each,  it  is  manifest  that  the  adequate  interpo- 
sition to  which  it  relates  must  be,  not  a  single,  but  a  concurrent 
interposition. 

If  we  pass  from  the  third  to  the  seventh  resolution,  which, 
though  it  repeats  and  re-enforces  the  third,  and  which  is  always 
skipped  over  by  the  nullifying  commentators,  the  fallacy  of 
their  claim  will  at  once  be  seen.  The  resolution  is  in  the  fol- 
lowing words:  "That  the  good  people  of  the  Commonwealth 
having  ever  felt  and  continuing  to  feel  the  most  sincere  affec- 
tion to  their  brethren  of  the  other  States,  the  truest  anxiety  for 
establishing  and  perpetuating  the  union  of  all,  and  the  most 
scrupulous  fidelity  to  that  Constitution  which  is  the  pledge  of 
mutual  friendship  and  the  instrument  of  mutual  happiness,  the 
General  Assembly  doth  solemnly  appeal  to  the  like  dispositions 
in  the  other  States,  in  confidence  that  they  will  concur  with  this 
Commonwealth  in  declaring,  as  it  does  hereby  declare,  that  the 
acts  aforesaid  are  unconstitutional,  and  that  the  necessary  and 
proper  measures  will  be  taken  by  each  for  co-operating  with 


1833-'6.  NULLIFICATION. 


401 


this  State  in  maintaining,  unimpaired,  the  authorities,  rights, 

and  liberties  reserved  to  the  States  respectively  or  to  the  peo- 
ple." Here  it  distinctly  appears,  as  in  the  third  resolution,  that 
the  course  contemplated  by  the  Legislature  for  "  maintaining 
the  authorities,  rights,  and  liberties  reserved  to  the  States  re- 
spectively," was  not  a  solitary  or  separate  interposition,  but  a 
co-operation  in  the  means  necessary  and  proper  for  the  purpose. 

If  a  farther  elucidation  of  the  view  of  the  Legislature  could 
be  needed,  it  happens  to  be  found  in  its  recorded  proceedings. 
In  the  seventh  resolution,  as  originally  proposed,  the  term  "un- 
constitutional" was  followed  by  "null,  void,  &c."  These  added 
words  being  considered  by  some  as  giving  pretext  for  some  dis- 
organizing misconstruction,  were  unanimously  stricken  out,  or, 
rather,  withdrawn  by  the  mover  of  the  resolutions. 

An  attempt  has  been  made,  by  ascribing  to  the  words  stricken 
out  a  nullifying  signification,  to  fix  on  the  reputed  draughtsman 
of  the  resolution  the  character  of  a  nullifier.  Could  thia  have 
been  effected,  it  would  only  have  vindicated  the  Legislature  the 
more  effectually  from  the  imputation  of  favouring  the  doctrine 
of  South  Carolina.  The  unanimous  erasure  of  nullifying  ex- 
pressions was  a  protest  by  the  House  of  Delegates  in  the  most 
emphatic  form  against  it. 

But  let  us  turn  to  the  report  which  explained  and  vindicated 
the  resolutions,  and  observe  the  light  in  which  it  placed  first 
the  third  and  then  the  seventh. 

It  must  be  recollected  that  this  document  proceeded  from 
representatives  chosen  by  the  people  some  months  after  the 
resolutions  had  been  before  them,  with  a  longer  period  for  man- 
ifesting their  sentiments  before  the  report  was  adopted,  and 
without  any  evidence  of  disapprobation  in  the  constituent  body. 
On  the  contrary,  it  is  known  to  have  been  received  by  the  Re- 
publican party,  a  decided  majority  of  the  people,  with  the  most 
entire  approbation.  The  report,  therefore,  must  be  regarded 
as  the  most  authoritative  evidence  of  the  meaning  attached  by 
the  State  to  the  resolutions.  This  consideration  makes  it  the 
more  extraordinary,  and,  let  it  be  added,  the  more  inexcusable 
in  those  who,  in  their  zeal  to  extract  a  particular  meaning  from 

vol.  iv.  2Q 


402  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-'C. 

a  particular  resolution,  not  only  shut  their  eyes  to  another  reso- 
lution, but  to  an  authentic  exposition  of  both. 

And  what  is  the  comment  of  the  report  on  that  particular 
resolution,  namely,  the  third? 

In  the  first  place,  it  conforms  to  the  resolution  in  using  the 
term  which  expresses  the  interposing  authority  of  the  States,  in 
t\\Q  plural  number  States,  not  in  the  singular  number  State.  It 
is,  indeed,  impossible  not  to  perceive  that  the  entire  current  and 
complexion  of  the  observations  explaining  and  vindicating  the 
resolutions  imply  necessarily,  that  by  the  interposition  of  the 
States  for  arresting  the  evil  of  usurpation  was  meant  a  concur- 
ring authority,  not  that  of  a  single  State;  while  the  collective 
meaning  of  the  term  gives  consistency  and  effect  to  the  reason- 
ing and  the  object. 

But  besides  this  general  evidence  that  the  report,  in  the  in- 
variable use  of  the  plural  term  States,  withheld  from  a  single 
State  the  right  expressed  in  the  resolution,  a  still  more  precise 
and  decisive  inference,  to  the  same  effect,  is  afforded  by  several 
passages  in  the  document. 

Thus  the  report  observes :  "The  States  then  being  the  par- 
ties to  the  constitutional  compact,  and  in  their  highest  sover- 
eign capacity,  it  follows,  of  necessity,  that  there  can  be  no  trib- 
unal above  their  authority  to  decide  in  the  last  resort  whether 
the  compact  made  by  them  be  violated;  and,  consequently,  that, 
as  the  parties  to  it,  they  must  themselves  decide  in  the  last  re- 
sort such  questions  as  may  be  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  require 
their  interposition." 

Now  apart  from  the  palpable  insufficiency  of  an  interposition 
by  a  single  State  to  effect  the  declared  object  of  the  interposi- 
tion, namely,  to  maintain  authorities  and  rights  which  must  be 
the  same  in  all  the  States,  it  is  not  true  that  there  would  be  no 
tribunal  above  the  authority  of  a  State  as  a  single  party;  the 
aggregate  authority  of  the  parties  being  a  tribunal  above  it  to 
decide  in  the  last  resort. 

Again  the  language  of  the  report  is,  "If  the  deliberate  exer- 
cise of  dangerous  powers,  palpably  withheld  by  the  Constitu- 
tion, could  not  justify  the  parties  to  it  in  interposing  even  so 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION. 


403 


far  as  to  arrest  the  progress  of  the  evil,  and  thereby  preserve 
the  Constitution  itself,  as  well  as  to  provide  for  the  safely  of 
the  parties  to  it,  there  would  be  an  end  to  all  relief  from  usurped 
power."  Apply  here  the  interposing  power  of  a  single  State, 
and  it  would  not  be  true  that  there  would  be  no  relief  from 
usurped  power.  A  sure  and  adequate  relief  would  exist  in  the 
interposition  of  the  States,  as  the  co-parties  to  the  Constitution, 
with  a  power  paramount  to  the  Constitution  itself. 

It  has  been  said  that  the  right  of  interposition  asserted  for 
the  States  by  the  proceedings  of  Virginia  could  not  be  meant  a 
right  for  them  in  their  collective  character  of  parties  to  and 
creators  of  the  Constitution,  because  that  was  a  right  by  none 
denied.  But  as  a  simple  truth  or  truism,  its  assertion  might 
not  be  out  of  place  when  applied,  as  in  the  resolution,  espe- 
cially in  an  avowed  recurrence  to  fundamental  principles,  as  in 
duty  called  for  by  the  occasion.  What  is  a  portion  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence  but  a  series  of  simple  and  unde- 
niable truths  or  truisms?  what  but  the  same  composed  a  great 
part  of  the  Declarations  of  Rights  prefixed  to  the  State  consti- 
tutions? It  appears,  however,  from  the  report  itself,  which  ex- 
plains the  resolutions,  that  the  last  resort  claimed  for  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States,  in  the  case  of  the  alien  and 
sedition  laws,  was  understood  to  require  a  recurrence  to  the 
ulterior  resort  in  the  authority  from  which  that  of  the  court 
was  derived.  The  language  of  the  report  is,  "But  it  is  ob- 
jected" [by  the  advocates  of  the  alien  and  sedition  acts]  that 
the  judicial  authority  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  sole  expositor  of 
the  Constitution  in  the  last  resort;  and  it  may  be  asked  for 
what  reason  the  declaration  by  the  General  Assembly,  suppos- 
ing it  to  be  theoretically  true,  could  be  required  at  the  present 
day  and  in  so  solemn  a  manner."  It  was,  as  we  have  seen,  in 
answering  this  objection,  that  the  report  observes,  "That  how- 
ever true  it  may  be  that  the  judicial  department,  in  all  questions 
submitted  to  it  by  the  forms  of  the  Constitution,  is  to  decide 

*  There  is  direct  proof  that  the  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  was  understood  by  the  Legislature  of  Virginia  to  have  been  an  asserted 
bar  to  an  interposition  by  the  States  against  the  alien  and  sedition  laws. 


404  WORK?    OF    MADISON.  18S5-'G. 

in  the  last  resort,  this  resort  must  necessarily  be  deemed  not 
flic  last  in  relation  to  the  rights  of  the  parties  to  the  constitu- 
tional compact,  from  which  the  judicial,  as  well  as  the  other  de- 
partments, hold  their  delegated  trusts.  On  any  other  hypothe- 
sis, the  delegation  of  judicial  power  would  annul  the  authoritv 
delegating  it,  and  the  concurrence  of  this  department  with  the 
others  in  usurped  powers  might  subject  forever,  and  beyond 
the  possible  reach  of  any  rightful  remedy,  the  very  Constitution 
which  all  were  instituted  to  preserve."  Again,  observes  the  re- 
port, "  The  truth  declared  in  the  resolution  being  established, 
the  expediency  of  making  the  declaration  at  the  present  day 
may  safely  be  left  to  the  temperate  consideration  and  candid 
judgment  of  the  American  public.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
a  frequent  recurrence  to  fundamental  principles  is  solemnly  en- 
joined by  most  of  the  State  constitutions,  and  particularly  by 
our  own,  as  a  necessary  safeguard  against  the  danger  of  degen- 
eracy, to  which  Republics  are  liable  as  well  as  other  Govern- 
ments, though  in  a  less  degree  than  others.  And  a  fair  com- 
parison of  the  political  doctrines,  not  unfrequent  at  the  present 
day,  with  those  which  characterized  the  epoch  of  our  Revolution, 
and  which  form  the  basis  of  our  Republican  constitutions,  will 
best  determine  whether  the  declaratory  recurrence  here  made 
to  those  principles  ought  to  be  viewed  as  unreasonable  and  im- 
proper, or  as  a  vigilant  discharge  of  an  important  duty.  The 
authority  of  constitutions  over  governments,  and  of  the  sov- 
ereignty of  the  people  over  constitutions,  are  truths  which  are 
at  all  times  necessary  to  be  kept  in  mind;  and  at  no  time,  per- 
haps, more  necessary  than  at  present." 

Who  can  avoid  seeing  the  necessity  of  understanding  by  the 
"parties"  to  the  constitutional  compact  the  authority  which 
made  the  compact,  and  from  which  all  the  departments  held  their 
delegated  trusts?  These  trusts  were  certainly  not  delegated 
by  a  single  party.  By  regarding  the  term  parties  in  its  plural, 
not  individual  meaning,  the  answer  to  the  objection  is  clear  and 
satisfactory.  Take  the  term  as  meaning  a  party,  and  not  the 
parties,  and  there  is  neither  truth  nor  argument  in  the  answer. 
But  farther,  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  rights  of  the  parties 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  I 

meant  the  rights  of  a  party,  it  would  not  be  true,  as  affirmed 
the  report,  that  "the  delegation  of  judicial  power  would  annul 
the  authority  delegating  it,  and  that  the  concurrence  of  this  de- 
partment with  others  in  usurped  power  might  subvert  fort 
and  beyond  the  reach  of  any  rightful  remedy  the  very  Consti- 
tution which  all  were  instituted  to  preserve."     However  defi- 
cient a  remedial  right  in  a  single  State  might  be  to  preserve  the 
Constitution  against  usurped  power,  an  ultimate  and  adequate 
remedy  would  always  exist  in  the  rights  of  the  parties  to  the 
Constitution,  in  whose  hands  the  Constitution  is  at  all  ti. 
but  clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter,  and  who  could  apply  a  rem- 
edy by  explaining,  amending,  or  remaking  it,  as  the  one  or  the 
other  mode  might  be  the  most  proper  remedy. 

Such  being  the  commcut  of  the  report  on  the  third  resolution, 
it  fully  demonstrates  the  meaning  attached  to  it  by  Virginia 
when  passing  it,  and  rescues  it  from  the  nullifying  misconstruc- 
tion into  which  the  resolution  has  been  distorted. 

Let  it  next  be  seen  how  far  the  comment  of  the  report  on  the 
seventh  resolution  above  inserted  accords  with  that  on  the  third; 
and  that  this  may  the  more  conveniently  be  scanned  by  every 
eye,  the  comment  is  subjoined  at  full  length. 

"The  fairness  and  regularity  of  the  course  of  proceedings  here 
pursued  have  not  protected  it  against  objections  even  from 
sources  too  respectable  to  be  disregarded. 

"It  has  been  said  that  it  belongs  to  the  judiciary  of  the  United 
States,  and  not  to  the  State  legislatures,  to  declare  the  meaning 
of  the  Federal  Constitution. 

"But  a  declaration  that  proceedings  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment are  not  warranted  by  the  Constitution,  is  a  novelty  neither 
among  the  citizens  nor  among  the  legislatures  of  the  States,  nor 
are  the  citizens  or  the  Legislature  of  Virginia  singular  in  the 
example  of  it. 

"Nor  can  the  declarations  of  either,  whether  affirming  or  de- 
nying the  constitutionality  of  measures  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, or  whether  made  before  or  after  judicial  decisions  thereon, 
be  deemed,  in  any  point  of  view,  an  assumption  of  the  office  of 
the  judge.     The  declarations  in  such  cases  are  expressions  of 


406  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-'6. 

opinions,  unaccompanied  with  any  other  effect  than  what  they 
may  produce  on  opinion  by  exciting;  reflection.  The  expositions 
of  the  judiciary,  on  the  other  hand,  arc  carried  into  immediate 
effect  by  force.  The  former  may  lead  to  a  change  in  the  legis- 
lative expressions  of  the  general  will,  possibly  to  a  change  in 
the  opinion  of  the  judiciary;  the  latter  enforces  the  general  will, 
while  that  will  and  that  opinion  continue  unchanged. 
'  "And  if  there  be  no  impropriety  in  declaring  the  unconstitu- 
tionality of  proceedings  in  the  Federal  Government,  where  can 
be  the  impropriety  of  communicating  the  declaration  to  other 
States,  and  inviting  their  concurrence  in  a  like  declaration? 
What  is  allowable  for  one  must  be  allowable  for  all;  and  a  free 
communication  among  the  States,  where  the  Constitution  im- 
poses no  restraint,  is  as  allowable  among  the  State  governments 
as  among  other  public  bodies  or  private  citizens.  This  consid- 
eration derives  a  weight  that  cannot  be  denied  to  it,  from  the 
relation  of  the  State  legislatures  to  the  Federal  Legislature,  as 
the  immediate  constituents  of  one  of  its  branches. 

"The  legislatures  of  the  States  have  a  right  also  to  originate 
amendments  to  the  Constitution,  by  a  concurrence  of  two-thirds 
of  the  whole  number,  in  applications  to  Congress  for  the  purpose. 
When  new  States  are  to  be  formed  by  a  junction  of  two  or  more 
States  or  parts  of  States,  the  legislatures  of  the  States  concerned 
are,  as  well  as  Congress,  to  concur  in  the  measure.  The  States 
have  a  right  also  to  enter  into  agreements  or  compacts,  with 
the  consent  of  Congress.  In  all  such  cases  a  communication 
among  them  results  from  the  object  which  is  common  to  them. 

"  It  is  lastly  to  be  seen  whether  the  confidence  expressed  by 
the  resolution,  that  the  necessary  and  proper  measures  would  be 
taken  by  the  other  States  for  co-operating  with  Virginia  in 
maintaining  the  rights  reserved  to  the  States  or  to  the  people, 
be  in  any  degree  liable  to  the  objections  which  have  been  raised 
against  it. 

"If  it  be  liable  to  objection,  it  must  be  because  either  the  ob- 
ject or  the  means  are  objectionable. 

"The  object  being  to  maintain  what  the  Constitution  has  or- 
dered, is  in  itself  a  laudable  object. 


183j-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  4qj 

"The  means  are  expressed  in  the  terms  'the  necessary  ami 
proper  measures.'  A  proper  object  was  to  be  pursued  by  means 
both  necessary  and  proper. 

"  To  find  an  objection,  then,  it  must  be  shown  that  some  mean- 
ing was  annexed  to  these  general  terms  which  was  not  proper; 
and  for  this  purpose  either  that  the  means  used  by  the  General 
Assembly  were  an  example  of  improper  means,  or  that  there 
were  no  proper  means  to  which  the  term  could  refer. 

"In  the  example  given  by  the  State,  of  declaring  the  alien 
and  sedition  acts  to  be  unconstitutional,  and  of  communicatiii"- 
the  declaration  to  the  other  States,  no  trace  of  improper  means 
has  appeared.  And  if  the  other  States  had  concurred  in  making 
a  like  declaration,  supported,  too,  by  the  numerous  applications 
flowing  immediately  from  the  people,  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted 
that  these  simple  means  would  have  been  as  sufficient  as  they 
are  unexceptionable. 

"  It  is  no  less  certain  that  other  means  might  have  been  em- 
ployed which  are  strictly  within  the  limits  of  the  Constitution. 
The  legislatures  of  the  States  might  have  made  a  direct  repre- 
sentation to  Congress,  with  a  view  to  obtain  a  rescinding  of  the 
two  offensive  acts;  or  they  might  have  represented  to  their  re- 
spective senators  in  Congress  their  wish  that  two-thirds  thereof 
would  propose  an  explanatory  amendment  to  the  Constitution; 
or  two-thirds  of  themselves,  if  such  had  been  their  option,  might, 
by  an  application  to  Congress,  have  obtained  a  convention  for 
the  same  object. 

"  These  several  means,  though  not  equally  eligible  in  them- 
selves, nor  probably  to  the  States,  were  all  constitutionally 
open  for  consideration.  And  if  the  General  Assembly,  after 
declaring  the  two  acts  to  be  unconstitutional,  the  first  and  most 
obvious  proceeding  on  the  subject,  did  not  undertake  to  point 
out  to  the  other  States  a  choice  among  the  farther  means  that 
might  become  necessary  and  proper,  the  reserve  will  not  be 
misconstrued  by  liberal  minds  into  any  culpable  imputation. 

"  These  observations  appear  to  form  a  satisfactory  reply  to 
every  objection  which  is  not  founded  on  a  misconception  of  the 
terms  employed  in  the  resolutions.     There  is  one  other,  how- 


408  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-'6. 

ever,  which  may  be  of  too  much  importance  not  to  be  added.  It 
cannot  be  forgotten,  that  among  the  arguments  addressed  to 
those  who  apprehended  danger  to  liberty  from  the  establishment 
of  the  General  Government  over  so  great  a  country,  the  appeal 
was  emphatically  made  to  the  intermediate  existence  of  the  State 
governments  between  the  people  and  that  Government,  to  the 
vigilance  with  which  they  would  descry  the  first  symptoms  of 
usurpation,  and  to  the  promptitude  with  which  they  would  sound 
the  alarm  to  the  public.  This  argument  was  probably  not  with- 
out its  effect;  and  if  it  was  a  proper  one  then  to  recommend  the 
establishment  of  the  Constitution,  it  must  be  a  proper  one  now 
to  assist  in  its  interpretation. 

"  The  only  part  of  the  two  concluding  resolutions  that  re- 
mains to  be  noticed,  is  the  repetition  in  the  first  of  that  warm 
affection  to  the  Union  and  its  members,  and  of  that  scrupulous 
fidelity  to  the  Constitution,  which  have  been  invariably  felt  by 
the  people  of  this  State.  As  the  proceedings  were  introduced 
with  these  sentiments,  they  could  not  be  more  properly  closed 
than  in  the  same  manner.  Should  there  be  any  so  far  misled 
as  to  call  in  question  the  sincerity  of  these  professions,  whatever 
regret  may  be  excited  by  the  error,  the  General  Assembly  can- 
not descend  into  a  discussion  of  it.  Those  who  have  listened  to 
the  suggestion  can  only  be  left  to  their  own  recollection  of  the 
part  which  this  State  has  borne  in  the  establishment  of  our 
national  independence,  in  the  establishment  of  our  national 
Constitution,  and  in  maintaining  under  it  the  authority  and 
laws  of  the  Union,  without  a  single  exception  of  internal  resist- 
ance or  commotion.  By  recurring  to  these  facts  they  will  be 
able  to  convince  themselves  that  the  representations  of  the  peo- 
ple of  Virginia  must  be  above  the  necessity  of  opposing  any 
other  shield  to  attacks  on  their  national  patriotism  than  their 
own  consciousness  and  the  justice  of  an  enlightened  public,  who 
will  perceive  in  the  resolutions  themselves  the  strongest  evi- 
dence of  attachment  both  to  the  Constitution  and  to  the  Union, 
since  it  is  only  by  maintaining  the  different  governments  and 
departments  within  their  respective  limits  that  the  blessings  of 
either  can  be  perpetuated." 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  409 

Here  is  certainly  not  a  shadow  of  countenance  to  the  doctrine 
of  nullification.  Under  every  aspect,  it  enforces  the  arguments 
and  authority  against  such  an  apocryphal  version  of  the  text. 

From  this  view  of  the  subject  those  who  will  duly  attend  to 
the  tenor  of  the  proceedings  of  Virginia  and  to  the  circum- 
stances of  the  period  when  they  took  place  will  concur  in  the 
fairness  of  disclaiming  the  inference  from  the  undeniableness  of 
a  truth,  that  it  could  not  be  the  truth  meant  to  be  asserted  in 
the  resolution.  The  employment  of  the  truth  asserted,  and  the 
reasons  for  it,  are  too  striking  to  be  denied  or  misunderstood. 
More  than  this,  the  remark  is  obvious,  that  those  who  resolve 
the  nullifying  claim  into  the  natural  right  to  resist  intolerable 
oppression,  are  precluded  from  inferring  that  to  be  the  right 
meant  by  the  resolution,  since  that  is  as  little  denied  as  the 
paramountship  of  the  authority  creating  a  Constitution  over  an 
authority  derived  from  it. 

The  true  question  therefore  is,  whether  there  be  a  constitu- 
tional right  in  a  single  State  to  nullify  a  law  of  the  United  States. 
We  have  seen  the  absurdity  of  such  a  claim  in  its  naked  and 
suicidal  form.  Let  us  turn  to  it  as  modified  by  South  Carolina, 
into  a  right  in  every  State  to  resist  within  itself  the  execution 
of  a  Federal  law  deemed  by  it  to  be  unconstitutional,  and  to 
demand  a  convention  of  the  States  to  decide  the  question  of 
constitutionality;  the  annulment  of  the  law  to  continue  in  the 
mean  time,  and  to  be  permanent  unless  three-fourths  of  the  States 
concur  in  overruling  the  annulment. 

Thus,  during  the  temporary  nullification  of  the  law,  the  results 
would  be  the  same  from  [as?]  those  proceeding  from  an  unqual- 
ified nullification,  and  the  result  of  a  convention  might  be  that 
seven  out  of  twenty-four  States  might  make  the  temporary  re- 
sults permanent.  It  follows,  that  any  State  which  could  obtain 
the  concurrence  of  six  others  might  abrogate  any  law  of  the 
United  States,  constructively,  whatever,  and  give  to  the  Con- 
stitution any  shape  they  please,  in  opposition  to  the  construc- 
tion and  will  of  the  other  seventeen,  each  of  the  seventeen  hav- 
ing an  equal  right  and  authority  with  each  of  the  seven.  Every 
feature  in  the  Constitution  might  thus  be  successively  changed; 


410  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-!6. 

and  after  a  scene  of  unexampled  confusion  and  distraction,  what 
had  been  unanimously  agreed  to  as  a  whole,  would  not,  as  a 
whole,  be  agreed  to  by  a  single  party.  The  amount  of  this  mod- 
ified right  of  nullification  is,  that  a  single  State  may  arrest  the 
operation  of  a  law  of  the  United  States,  and  institute  a  process 
which  is  to  terminate  in  the  ascendency  of  a  minority  over  a 
large  majority  in  a  republican  system,  the  characteristic  rule  of 
which  is,  that  the  major  will  is  the  ruling  will.  And  this  new- 
fangled theory  is  attempted  to  be  fathered  on  Mr.  Jefferson,  the 
apostle  of  republicanism,  and  whose  own  words  declare  that 
"  acquiescence  in  the  decision  of  the  majority  is  the  vital  prin- 
ciple of  it."     [See  his  Inaugural  Address.] 

Well  might  Virginia  declare,  as  her  Legislature  did  by  a  res- 
olution of  1833,  that  the  resolutions  of  1798-99  gave  no  support 
to  the  nullifying  doctrine  of  South  Carolina.  And  well  may  the 
friends  of  Mr.  Jefferson  disclaim  any  sanction  to  it  or  to  any 
constitutional  right  of  nullification  from  his  opinions.  His  mean- 
ing is  fortunately  rescued  from  such  imputations  by  the  very 
document  procured  from  his  files  and  so  triumphantly  appealed 
to  by  the  nullifying  partisans  of  every  description.  In  this  doc- 
ument the  remedial  right  of  nullification  is  expressly  called  a 
natural  right,  and,  consequently,  not  a  right  derived  from  the 
Constitution,  but  from  abuses  or  usurpations,  releasing  the  par 
ties  to  it  from  their  obligation.* 

*  No  example  of  the  inconsistency  of  party  zeal  can  be  greater  than  is  seen  in 
the  value  allowed  to  Mr.  Jefferson's  authority  by  the  nullifying  party,  while  they 
disregard  his  repeated  assertions  of  the  Federal  authority,  even  under  the  Arti- 
cles of  Confederation,  to  stop  the  commerce  of  a  refractory  State  ;  while  they 
abhor  his  opinions  and  propositions  on  the  subject  of  slavery,  and  overlook  his 
declaration  that  in  a  Republic  it  is  a  vital  principle  that  the  minority  must  yield 
to  the  majority.  They  seize  on  an  expression  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  that  nullification 
is  the  rightful  remedy,  as  the  Shibboleth  of  their  party,  and  almost  a  sanctifica- 
tion  of  their  cause.  But  in  addition  to  their  inconsistency,  their  zeal  is  guilty  of 
the  subterfuge  of  dropping  a  part  of  the  language  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  which  shows 
his  meaning  to  be  entirely  at  variance  with  the  nullifying  construction.  His 
words  in  the  document  appealed  to  as  the  infallible  test  of  his  opinions  are  : 
********* 

Thus  the  right  of  nullification  meant  by  Mr.  Jefferson  is  the  natural  right,  which 
all  admit  to  be  a  remedy  against  insupportable  oppression.    It  cannot  be  sup- 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION 


111 


It  is  said  that  in  several  instances  the  authority  and  laws  of 
the  United  States  have  been  successfully  nullified  by  the  par- 
ticular States.  This  may  have  occurred  possibly  in  urgent 
cases,  and  in  confidence  that  it  would  not  he  at  variance  with 
the  construction  of  the  Federal  Government;  or  in  cases  where, 
operating  within  the  nullifying-  State  alone,  it  might  be  con- 
nived at  as  a  lesser  evil  than  a  resort  to  force;  or  in  cases  not 
falling  within  the  Federal  jurisdiction;  or,  finally,  in  cases 
deemed  by  the  States  subversive  of  their  essential  rights,  and 
justified,  therefore,-  by  the  natural  right  of  self-preservation. 
Be  all  this  as  it  may,  examples  of  nullification,  though  passing 
off  without  any  immediate  disturbance  of  the  public  order,  are 
to  be  deplored,  as  weakening  the  common  Government,  and  as 
undermining  the  Union.  One  thing  seems  to  be  certain,  that 
the  States  which  have  exposed  themselves  to  the  charge  of  nulli- 

posecl  for  a  moment  that  Mr.  Jefferson  would  not  revolt  at  the  doctrine  of  South 
Carolina,  that  a  single  State  could  constitutionally  resist  a  law  of  the  Union  while 

remaining  within  it;  and,  with  the  accession  of  a  small  minority  of  the  others, 
overrule  the  will  of  a  great  majority  of  the  whole,  and  constitutionally  annul  the 
law  everywhere. 

If  the  right  of  nullification  meant  by  him  had  not  been  thus  guarded  against  a 
perversiou  of  it,  let  him  be  his  own  interpreter  in  his  letter  to  Mr.  Giles  in  De- 
cember. 1826,  in  which  he  makes  the  rightful  remedy  of  a  State  in  an  extreme 
case  to  be  a  separation  from  the  Union,  not  a  resistance  to  its  authority  while  re- 
maining in  it.(a)  The  authority  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  therefore,  belongs  not,  but  is 
directly  opposed,  to  the  nullifying  party  who  have  so  unwarrantably  availed 
themselves  of  it. 

(a)  The  following  extract  of  a  letter  from  Thomas  Jefferson  to  James  Madison,  August  23, 1799, 
(MS.,)  in  which  the  last  paragraph  adds  to  what  is  said  in  his  letter  of  September  5,  1799,  to  W. 
C.  Nicholas,  a  proof  that  the  right  of  a  State,  as  a  party  to  the  contract,  was  not  a  right  of  a  single 
one  to  resist  or  nullify  the  authority  of  the  Union  while  a  member,  but  a  natural  right  to  sever 
itself  therefrom  when  subverting  its  essential  and  reserved  right  of  sell-government :  "  But  drier- 
mined  were  we  to  be  disappointed  in  this,  to  sever  ourselves  from  that  Union  we  so  much  value, 
rather  than  give  up  the  rights  of  self-government,  which  we  have  reserved,  and  in  which  alone 
we  see  liberty,  safety,  and  happiness." 

B@-  The  asterisks  on  the  preceding  page  are  supposed  to  represent  the  following  passage,  from  a  paper  purporting 
to  he  Mr.  Jefferson's  original  draught  of  the  Kentucky  Resolutions,  republished  in  the  "  Democratic  Text  Book  of 
'98  and  '99,"  [Philadelphia,  163-1,1  p.  29 : 

"That  in  cases  of  the  abuse  of  the  delegated  power,  the  members  of  the  General  Government  by  the 

people,  a  change  by  the  people  wou  d  be  the  constitutional  remedy;  but   where  powi  I,  which  have 

not  been  delegated,  a  nullification  of  the  act  is  the  rightful  reme  iv  :  that  every  State  baa  •  natural  rlgbl  In 
not  within  the  compact  [casus  non  fiederis]  to  nullify,  of  their  own  authority,  all  assumptions  "I  power  uj  others 
within  their  limits;  that,  without  this  right,  they  would  l>e  under  the  dominion,  absolute  and  unlimited,  of  whom. 

soever  might  execise  this  right  of  judgment  tot  them;  4c."    [See  Richmond  Enq r,  March  f 1,  i  -  •  .  0.  8  Weekly 

Telegraph,  vol.  5,  p.  781,  April  12,  1S3J;  a  letter  from  T.  Jefferson  Randolph  to  Warren  R.  I1 

V.  S.  W.  T.,  vol.  5,  p.  579,  March  19,  1S32;  and  letters  from  Mr   Madison  to  Mr.  Ti  ist,  June  3  and  September  23, 

1SS0;  and  to  Mr.  Everett,  August  20  aud  September  10,  1530;  ante,  pp.  s7, 110,  106,  109.) 


412  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-'G. 

fication,  have,  with  the  exception  of  South  Carolina,  disclaimed 
it  as  a  constitutional  right,  and  have,  moreover,  protested  against 
it  as  modified  by  the  process  of  South  Carolina. 

The  conduct  of  Pennsylvania,  and  the  opinions  of  Judges 
M'Kean  and  Tilghman,  have  been  particularly  dwelt  on  by  the 
nullifiers.  But  the  final  acquiescence  of  the  State  in  the  au- 
thority of  the  Federal  judiciary  transfers  their  authority  to  the 
other  scale,  and  it  is  believed  that  the  opinions  of  the  two  judges 
have  been  superseded  by  those  of  their  brethren,  which  have 
been  since,  and  at  the  present  time  are,  opposed  to  them. 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  show  that  the  resolutions  of 
Virginia  contemplated  a  forcible  resistence  to  the  alien  and 
sedition  laws;  and  as  evidence  of  it,  the  laws  relating  to  the 
armory,  and  a  habeas  corpus  for  the  protection  of  members  of 
her  Legislature,  have  been  brought  into  view.  It  happens, 
however,  as  has  been  ascertained  by  the  recorded  dates,  that 
the  first  of  these  laws  was  enacted  prior  to  the  alien  and  sedi- 
tion laws.  As  to  the  last,  it  appears  that  it  was  a  general  law, 
providing  for  other  emergencies  as  well  as  Federal  arrests,  and 
its  applicability  never  tested  by  any  occurrence  under  the  alien 
and  sedition  laws.  The  law  did  not  necessarily  preclude  an 
acquiescence  in  the  supervising  decision  of  the  Federal  judiciary, 
should  that  not  sustain  the  habeas  corpus,  which,  it  might  be 
calculated,  would  be  sustained.  And  all  must  agree,  that  cases 
might  arise  of  such  violations  of  the  security  and  privileges  of 
representatives  of  the  people  as  would  justify  the  States  in  a 
resort  to  the  natural  law  of  self-preservation.  The  extent  of 
the  privileges  of  the  Federal  and  State  representatives  of  the 
people  against  criminal  charges  by  the  two  authorities,  recip- 
rocally involves  delicate  questions,  which  it  may  be  better  to 
leave  for  those  who  are  to  decide  on  them,  than  unnecessarily 
to  discuss  them  in  advance.  The  moderate  views  of  Virginia 
on  the  critical  occasion  of  the  alien  and  sedition  laws  are  illus- 
trated by  the  terms  of  the  seventh  resolution,  with  an  eye  to 
which  the  third  resolution  ought  always  to  be  expounded,  by 
the  unanimous  erasure  of  the  terms  "null,  void,"  &c,  from  the 
seventh  article  as  it  stood;  and  by  the  condemnation  and  im- 


1835-6.  NULLIFICATION.  413 

prisonment  of  Callender  under  the  law,  without  the  slightest 
opposition  on  the  part  of  the  State.  So  far  was  the  State  from 
countenancing  the  nullifying  doctrine,  that  the  occasion  was 
viewed  as  a  proper  one  for  exemplifying  its  devotion  to  public 
order,  and  acquiescence  in  laws  which  it  deemed  unconstitu- 
tional, while  those  laws  were  not  constitutionally  repealed. 
The  language  of  the  Governor,  in  a  letter  to  a  friend,  will  best 
attest  the  principles  and  feelings  which  dictated  the  course  pur- 
sued on  the  occasion.* 

It  is  sometimes  asked  in  what  mode  the  States  could  inter- 
pose in  their  collective  character  as  parties  to  the  Constitution 
against  usurped  power.  It  was  not  necessary  for  the  object 
and  reasoning  of  the  resolutions  and  report,  that  the  mode 
should  be  pointed  out.  It  was  sufficient  to  show  that  the  au- 
thority to  interpose  existed,  and  was  a  resort  beyond  that  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  or  any  authority  derived 
from  the  Constitution.  The  authority  being  plenary,  the  mode 
was  of  its  own  choice;  and  it  is  obvious  that,  if  employed  by 
the  States  as  co-parties  to  and  creators  of  the  Constitution,  it 
might  either  so  explain  the  Constitution  or  so  amend  it  as  to 

*  Extract  of  a  letter  from  J.  Monroe  to  J.  Madison,  dated  Albemarle.  May  15, 
1800:  "  Besides.  I  think  there  is  cause  to  suspect  the  sedition  law  will  be  carried 
into  effect  in  this  State  at  the  approaching  Federal  court,  and  I  ought  to  be  there 
[Richmond]  to  aid  in  preventing  trouble.  A  camp  is  formed  of  about  400  men 
at  Warwick,  four  miles  below  Richmond,  and  no  motive  for  it  assigned  except  to 
proceed  to  Harper's  Ferry  to  sow  cabbage-seed.  But  the  gardening  season  is 
passing,  and  this  camp  remains.  I  think  it  possible  an  idea  may  be  entertained 
of  opposition,  and  by  means  whereof  the  fair  prospect  of  the  Republican  party 
may  be  overcast.  But  in  this  they  are  deceived,  as  certain  characters  in  Rich- 
mond and  some  neighbouring  counties  are  already  warned  of  their  danger,  so 
that  an  attempt  to  excite  a  hot-water  insurrection  will  fail." 

Extract  from  another  letter  from  J.  Monroe  to  J.  M..  dated  Richmond,  June  4, 
1800:  "  The  conduct  of  the  people  on  this  occasion  was  exemplary,  and  does 
them  the  highest  honour.  They  seemed  aware  the  crisis  demanded  of  tbem  a 
proof  of  their  respect  for  law  and  order,  and  resolved  to  show  they  were  equal 
to  it.  I  am  satisfied  a  different  conduct  was  expected  from  them,  for  everything 
that  could  was  done  to  provoke  it.  It  only  remains  that  this  business  be  closed 
on  the  part  of  the  people,  as  it  has  been  so  far  acted;  that  the  judge,  after  finish- 
ing his  career,  go  off  in  peace,  without  experiencing  the  slightest  insult  from 
any  one;  and  that  this  will  be  the  case  I  have  no  doubt." 


414  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-G. 

provide  a  more  satisfactory  mode  within  the  Constitution  itself 
for  guarding  it  against  constructive  or  other  violations. 

It  remains,  however,  for  the  nullifying  expositors  to  specify 
the  right  and  mode  of  interposition  which  the  resolution  meant 
to  assign  to  the  States  individually.  They  cannot  say  it  was  a 
natural  right  to  resist  intolerable  oppression;  for  that  was  a 
right  not  less  admitted  by  all  than  the  collective  right  of  the 
States  as  parties  to  the  Constitution,  the  non-denial  of  which 
was  urged  as  a  proof  that  it  could  not  be  meant  by  the  resolu- 
tions. 

They  cannot  say  that  the  right  meant  was  a  constitutional 
right  to  resist  the  constitutional  authority;  for  that  is  a  con- 
tradiction in  terms,  as  much  as  a  legal  right  to  resist  a  law. 

They  can  find  no  middle  ground  between  a  natural  and  a  con- 
stitutional right,  on  which  a  right  of  nullifying  interposition 
can  be  placed;  and  it  is  curious  to  observe  the  awkwardness  of 
the  attempt  by  the  most  ingenious  advocates  [Upshur  and  Ber- 
rien.] 

They  will  not  rest  the  claim  as  modified  by  South  Carolina, 
for  that  has  scarce  an  advocate  out  of  the  State,  and  owes  the 
remnant  of  its  popularity  there  to  the  disguise  under  which  it 
is  now  kept  alive;  some  of  the  leaders  of  the  party  admitting 
its  indefensibility  in  its  naked  shape. 

The  result  is,  that  the  nullifiers,  instead  of  proving  that  the 
resolution  meant  nullification,  would  prove  that  it  was  alto- 
gether without  meaning. 

It  appears  from  this  review,  that  the  right  asserted  and  exer- 
cised by  the  Legislature,  to  declare  an  act  of  Congress  uncon- 
stitutional, had  been  denied  by  the  defenders  of  the  alien  and 
sedition  acts  as  an  interference  with  the  judicial  authority;  and, 
consequently,  that  the  reasonings  employed  by  the  Legislature 
were  called  for  by  the  doctrines  and  inferences  drawn  from  that 
authority,  and  were  not  an  idle  display  of  what  no  one  denied. 

It  appears  still  farther,  that  the  efficacious  interposition  con- 
templated by  the  Legislature  was  a  concurring  and  co-operating 
interposition  of  the  States,  not  that  of  a  single  State. 

It  appears  that  the  Legislature  expressly  disclaimed  the  idea 


l835-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  |  |  - 

that  a  declaration  of  a  State  that  a  law  of  the  United  States  was 
unconstitutional,  had  the  effect  of  annulling  the  law. 

It  appears  that  the  object  to  be  attained  by  the  invited  co- 
operation with  Virginia  was.  as  expressed  in  the  third  and 
Beventh  resolutions,  to  maintain  within  the  several  States  their 
respective  authorities,  rights,  and  liberties,  whieli  could  not  be 

constitutionally  different  in  different  States,  nor  in< sistenl 

with  a  sameness  in  the  authority  and  laws  of  the  United  States 
in  all  and  in  each. 

It  appears  that  the  means  contemplated  by  the  Legislature 
for  attaining  the  object,  were  measures  recognised  and  designa- 
ted by  the  Constitution  itself. 

Lastly,  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  concurring  measures  of 
the  States,  without  any  nullifying  interposition  whatever,  did 
attain  the  contemplated  object;  a  triumph  over  the  obnoxious 
acts,  and  an  apparent  abandonment  of  them  forever. 

It  has  been  said  or  insinuated  that  the  proceeding-  of  Vir- 
ginia in  1798-99  had  not  the  influence  ascribed  to  them  in  bring- 
ing about  that  result.  Whether  the  influence  was  or  was  not 
such  as  has  been  claimed  for  them,  is  a  question  that  (h»x<  not 
affect  the  meaning  and  intention  of  the  proceedings.  But  as  a 
question  of  fact  the  decision  may  be  safely  left  to  the  recollec- 
tion of  those  who  were  contemporary  with  the  crisis,  and  to  the 
researches  of  those  who  were  not.  taking  for  their  guide-  the 
reception  given  to  the  proceedings  by  the  Republican  party 
everywhere,  and  the  pains  taken  by  it  in  multiplying  republica- 
tions of  them  in  newspapers  and  in  other  forms. 

What  the  effect  might  have  been  if  Virginia  had  remained 
patient  and  silent,  and  still  more  if  she  had  sided  with  South 
Carolina  in  favour  of  the  alien  and  sedition  acts,  can  lie  but  a 
matter  of  conjecture. 

What  would  have  been  thought  of  her  if  she  had  recommended 
the  nullifying  project  of  South  Carolina,  may  be  estimated  by 
the  reception  given  to  it  under  all  the  factitious  gloss,  and  in 
the  midst  of  the  peculiar  excitement  of  which  advantage  has 
been  taken  by  the  partisans  of  that  anomalous  conceit. 

It  has  been  sufficiently  shown,  from  the  language  of  the  report, 


411}  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-'6. 

as  lias  been  seen,  that  the  right  in  the  States  to  interpose  decla- 
rations and  protests  against  unconstitutional  acts  of  Congress 
had  been  denied;  and  that  the  reasoning  in  the  resolutions  was 
called  for  by  that  denial.  But  the  triumphant  tone  with  which  it 
is  affirmed  and  reiterated  that  the  resolutions  must  have  been 
directed  against  what  no  one  denied,  unless  they  were  meant  to 
assert  the  right  of  a  single  State  to  arrest  and  annul  the  acts 
of  the  Federal  Legislature,  makes  it  proper  to  adduce  a  proof 
of  the  fact  that  the  declaratory  right  was  denied,  which,  if  it 
does  not  silence  the  advocate  of  nullification,  must  render  every 
candid  ear  indignant  at  the  repetition  of  the  untruth. 

The  proof  is  found  in  the  recorded  votes  of  a  large  and  re- 
spectable portion  of  the  House  of  Delegates,  at  the  time  of  pass- 
ing the  report. 

A  motion  [see  the  journal]  offered  at  the  closing  scene  affirms 
"that  protests  made  by  the  Legislature  of  this  or  any  other 
State  against  particular  acts  of  Congress  as  unconstitutional, 
accompanied  by  invitations  to  other  States  to  join  in  such  pro- 
tests, are  improper  and  unauthorized  assumptions  of  power,  not 
permitted  nor  intended  to  be  permitted  to  the  State  legislatures. 
And  inasmuch  as  correspondent  sentiments  with  the  -present  have 
been  expressed  by  those  of  our  sister  States  who  have  acted  on 
the  resolutions  [of  1798,]  Resolved,  therefore,  that  the  present 
General  Assembly,  convinced  of  the  impropriety  of  the  resolu- 
tions of  the  last  Assembly,  deem  it  inexpedient  farther  to  act 
on  the  said  resolutions." 

On  this  resolution  the  votes,  according  to  the  yeas  and  nays, 
were  fifty-seven  of  the  former,  ninety-eight  of  the  latter. 

Here,  then,  within  the  House  of  Delegates  itself,  more  than 
one-third  of  the  whole  number  denied  the  right  of  the  State  Le- 
gislature to  proceed  by  acts  merely  declaratory  against  the  con- 
stitutionality of  acts  of  Congress,  and  affirmed,  moreover,  that 
the  States  who  had  acted  on  the  resolutions  of  Virginia  enter- 
tained the  same  sentiments.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  minority, 
who  denied  the  right  of  the  legislatures  even  to  protest,  admit- 
ted the  right  of  the  States  in  the  capacity  of  parties,  without 
claiming  it  for  a  single  State. 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  117 

Witli  tliis  testimony  under  the  eye,  it  may  surely  be  expected 
that  it  will  never  again  be  said  thai  Buch  a  right  bad  never  been 
denied,  nor  the  pretext  again  reported  to,  that,  without  such  a 
denial,  the  nullifying  doctrine  alone  could  satisfy  the  true  mean- 
ing of  the  Legislature."- 

It  has  been  asked  whether  every  right  lias  not  its  re dy;  and 

what  other  remedy  exists,  under  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  against  usurpations  of  power,  bul  a  right  in  the  States 
individually  to  annul  and  resist  them. 

The  plain  answer  is,  that  the  remedy  is  the  same  under  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  as  under  all  other  govern- 
ments, established  and  organized  on  free  principle.-.  The  first 
remedy  is  in  the  checks  provided  among  the  constituted  authori- 
ties; that  failing,  the  next  is  in  the  Influence  of  the  ballot-boxes 
and  hustings;  that  again  failing,  the  appeal  lies  to  the  power 
that  made  the  Constitution,  and  can  explain,  amend,  or  remake 
it.  Should  this  resort  also  fail,  and  the  power  usurped  lie  sus- 
tained in  its  oppressive  exercise  on  a  minority  by  a  majority, 
the  final  course  to  be  pursued  by  the  minority  must  lie  a  -ubject 
of  calculation,  in  which  the  degree  of  oppression,  the  means  of 
resistance,  the  consequences  of  its  failure,  and  the  consequences 
of  its  success,  must  be  the  elements. 

Does  not  this  view  of  the  case  equally  belong  to  every  one 
of  the  Stale-,  Virginia  for  example? 

Should  the  constituted  authority  of  the  State  unite  in  usurp- 
ing oppressive  powers;  should  the  constituent  body  fail  to  arrest 
the  progress  of  the  evil  through  the  elective  process,  according 
to  the  forms  of  the  Constitution;  and  should  the  authority  which 
is  above  that  of  the  Constitution,  the  majority  of  the  people,  in- 
flexibly support  the  oppression  inflicted  on  the  minority,  noth- 
ing would  remain  for  the  minority  but  to  rally  to  its  reserved 
rights,  (for  every  citizen  has  his  reserved  rights,  as  exemplified 

*  See  the  instructions  to  the  members  of  Congress  passed  at  the  Bame  Bession, 

which  do  not  squint  at  the  nullifying  idea;  see  also  the  protest  of  the  minority  in 
the  Virginia  Legislature,  and  the  report  of  the  committee  of  Congress  on  the  pro- 
ceedings of  Virginia. 

VOL.   IV.  27 


418  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-C. 

in  declarations  prefixed  to  most  of  the  State  constitutions,)  and 
to  decide  between  acquiescence  and  insistence,  according  to  the 
calculation  above  stated. 

Those  who  question  the  analogy  in  this  respect  between  the  two 
cases,  however  different  they  may  be  in  some  other  respects,  must 
say,  as  someof  them,  with  a  boldness  truly  astonishing,  do  say,  that 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  which,  as  such,  and  under 
that  name,  was  presented  to  and  accepted  by  those  who  ratified 
it;  which  has  been  so  deemed  and  so  called  by  those  living  un- 
der it  for  nearly  half  a  century;  and,  as  such,  sworn  to  by  every 
officer,  State  as  well  as  Federal,  is  yet  no  Constitution,  but  a 
treaty  or  league,  or,  at  most,  a  Confederacy  among  nations,  as 
independent  and  sovereign  in  relation  to  each  other  as  before 
the  charter  which  calls  itself  a  Constitution  was  formed. 

The  same  zealots  must  again  say,  as  they  do  with  a  like  bold- 
ness and  incongruity,  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 
which  has  been  so  deemed  and  so  called  from  its  birth  to  the 
present  time;  which  is  organized  in  the  regular  forms  of  repre- 
sentative governments,  and,  like  them,  operates  directly  on  the 
individuals  represented,  and  whose  laws  are  declared  to  be  the 
supreme  law  of  the  land,  with  a  physical  force  in  the  Govern- 
ment for  executing  them,  is  yet  no  Government,  but  a  mere 
agency,  a  power  of  attorney,  revocable  at  the  will  of  any  of  the 
parties  granting  it. 

Strange  as  it  must  appear,  there  are  some  who  maintain  these 
doctrines  and  hold  this  language;  and,  what  is  stranger  still, 
denounce  those  as  heretics  and  apostates  who  adhere  to  the  lan- 
guage and  tenets  of  their  fathers;  and  this  is  done  with  an  ex- 
ulting question,  whether  every  right  has  not  its  remedy;  and 
what  remedy  can  be  found  against  Federal  usurpations  other 
than  that  of  a  right  in  every  State  to  nullify  and  resist  the  Fed- 
eral acts  at  its  pleasure? 

Yet  it  may  be  safely  admitted  that  every  right  has  its  rem- 
edy, as  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  remedy  under  the  Consti- 
tution lies  where  it  has  been  marked  out  by  the  Constitution; 
and  that  no  appeal  can  be  consistently  made  from  that  remedy 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  ,||y 

by  those  who  were  and  still  profess  to  be  parties  to  it.  but   the 
appeal  to  the  parties  themselves,  having  an  authority  above  the 

Constitution,  or  to  the  law  of  nature  and  of  nature's  God. 

It  is  painful  to  be  obliged  to  notice  Buch  a  sophism  as  that  by 
which  this  inference  is  assailed.  Because  an  unconstitutional 
law  is  no  law,  it  is  alleged  that  it  may  be  constitutionally  dis- 
obeyed by  all  who  think  it  unconstitutional.  The  fallacy  i-  30 
obvious  that  it  can  impose  on  none  but  the  most  biased  or  heed- 
less observers.  It  makes  no  distinction,  where  the  distinction 
is  obvious  and  essential,  between  the  case  of  a  law  confessedly 
unconstitutional  and  a  case  turning  on  a  doubt  and  a  divided 
opinion  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution;  on  a  question, 
not  whether  the  Constitution  ought  or  ought  not  to  be  obeyed. 
but  on  the  question,  what  is  the  Constitution?  And  can  it  be 
seriously  and  deliberately  maintained,  that  every  individual,  or 
every  subordinate  authority,  or  every  party  to  the  compact,  has 
a  right  to  take  for  granted  that  its  construction  is  the  infallible 
one,  and  to  act  upon  it  against  the  construction  of  all  others, 
having  an  equal  right  to  expound  the  instrument,  nay,  against 
regular  expositions  of  the  constituted  authorities,  with  the  tacit 
sanction  of  the  community?  Such  a  doctrine  must  be  seen  at 
once  to  be  subversive  of  all  constitutions,  all  laws,  and  all  com- 
pacts. The  provision  made  by  a  Constitution  for  its  own  ex- 
position, through  its  own  authorities  and  forms,  must  prevail 
while  the  Constitution  is  left  to  itself  by  those  who  made  it,  or 
until  cases  arise  which  justify  a  resort  to  the  ultra-constitutional 
interpositions. 

The  main  pillar  of  nullification  is  the  assumption  that  sover- 
eignty is  a  unit  at  once  indivisible  and  unalienable;  that  the 
States,  therefore,  individually  retain  it  entire  as  they  originally 
held  it;  and,  consequently,  that  no  portion  of  it  cau  belong  to 
the  United  States. 

But  is  not  the  Constitution  itself  necessarily  the  offspring  of 
a  sovereign  authority  ?  What  but  the  highest  political  author- 
ity, a  sovereign  authority,  could  make  such  a  Constitution?  a 
Constitution  which  makes  a  Government;  a  Government  winch 
makes  laws;  laws  which  operate  like  the  laws  of  all  other  Gov- 


420  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-'6. 

ernments,  by  a  penal  and  physical  force,  on  the  individuals  sub- 
ject to  the  laws;  and,  finally,  laws  declared  to  be  the  supreme 
law  of  the  land,  anything  in  the  Constitution  or  laws  of  the  in- 
dividual States  notwithstanding. 

And  where  does  the  sovereignty  which  makes  such  a  Consti- 
tution reside?  It  resides,  not  in  a  single  State,  but  in  the  peo- 
ple of  each  of  the  several  States,  uniting  with  those  of  the  others 
in  the  express  and  solemn  compact  which  forms  the  Constitu- 
tion. To  the  extent  of  that  compact  or  Constitution,  therefore, 
the  people  of  the  several  States  must  be  a  sovereign  as  they  are 
a  united  people. 

In  like  manner  the  constitutions  of  the  States,  made  by  the 
people  as  separated  into  States,  were  made  by  a  sovereign  au- 
thority, by  a  sovereignty  residing  in  each  of  the  States,  to  the 
extent  of  the  objects  embraced  by  their  respective  constitutions. 
And  if  the  States  be  thus  sovereign,  though  shorn  of  so  many 
of  the  essential  attributes  of  sovereignty,  the  United  States,  by 
virtue  of  the  sovereign  attributes  with  which  they  are  endowed, 
may  to  that  extent  be  sovereign,  though  destitute  of  the  attri- 
butes of  which  the  States  are  not  shorn. 

Such  is  the  political  system  of  the  United  States,  dejure  and 
de facto;  and  however  it  may  be  obscured  by  the  ingenuity  and 
technicalities  of  controversial  commentators,  its  true  character 
will  be  sustained  by  an  appeal  to  the  law  and  the  testimony  of 
the  fundamental  charter. 

The  more  the  political  system  of  the  United  States  is  fairly 
examined,  the  more  necessary  it  will  be  found  to  abandon  the 
abstract  and  technical  modes  of  expounding  and  designating  its 
character;  aud  to  view  it  as  laid  down  in  the  charter  which 
constitutes  it,  as  a  system  hitherto  without  a  model,  as  neither 
a  simple  nor  a  consolidated  Government,  nor  a  Government  al- 
together confederate,  and,  therefore,  not  to  be  explained  so  as 
to  make  it  either,  but  to  be  explained  and  designated  according 
to  the  actual  division  and  distribution  of  political  power  on  the 
face  of  the  instrument. 

A  just  inference  from  a  survey  of  this  political  system  is,  that 
it  is  a  division  and  distribution  of  political  power  nowhere  else 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  421 

to  be  found;  a  nondescript,  lo  be  tested  and  explained  by  Itself 
alone;  and  that  it  happily  illustrates  the  diversified  modifica- 
tions of  which  the  representative  principle  of  republicanism  is 
susceptible,  with  a  view  to  the  conditions,  opinions,  and  habits 
of  particular  communities. 

That  a  sovereignty  should  have  even  been  denied  to  the 
States  in  their  united  character,  may  well  excite  wonder  when 
it  is  recollected  that  the  Constitution  which  now  unites  them 
was  announced  by  the  Convention  which  formed  it  as  dividing 
sovereignty  between  the  Union  and  the  States;*  that  it  was 
presented  under  that  view  by  contemporary  expositions  recom- 
mending it  to  the  ratifying  authorities;'!"  that  it  is  proved  to 
have  been  so  understood  by  the  language  which  has  been  ap- 
plied to  it  constantly  and  notoriously;  that  this  has  been  the 
doctrine  and  language,  until  a  very  late  date,  even  by  those 
who  now  take  the  lead  in  making  a  denial  of  it  the  basis  of  the 
novel  notion  of  nullification.^:  So  familiar  is  sovereignty  in  the 
United  States  to  the  thoughts,  views,  and  opinions  even  of  its 
polemic  adversaries,  that  Mr.  Rowan,  in  his  elaborate  speech  in 
support  of  the  indivisibility  of  sovereignty,  relapsed,  before  the 
conclusion  of  his  argument,  into  the  idea  that  sovereignty  was 
partly  in  the  Union,  partly  in  the  States. §  Other  champions 
of  the  rights  of  the  States,  among  them  Mr.  Jefferson,  might  be 
appealed  to  as  bearing  testimony  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  Uni- 
ted States.  If  Burr  had  been  convicted  of  acts  defined  to  be 
treason,  which  it  is  allowed  can  be  committed  only  against  a 
sovereign  authority,  who  would  then  have  pleaded  the  want  of 
sovereignty  in  the  United  States?  Quere:  If  there  be  no  sov- 
ereignty in  the  United  States,  whether  the  crime  denominated 
treason  might  not  be  committed  without  falling  within  the  juris- 
diction of  the  States,  and,  consequently,  with  impunity? 

What  seems  to  be  an  obvious  and  indefeasible  proof  that  the 

*  See  the  letter  of  the  President  of  the  Convention  [Washington]  to  the  old 
Congress. 

t  See  Federalist  and  other  proofs. 

t  See  the  report  to  the  Legislature  of  South  Carolina  in  1828. 

§  See  his  speech  in  the  Richmond  Enquirer  of . 


422  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-'6. 

people  of  the  individual  States,  as  composing  the  United  States, 
must  possess  a  sovereignty,  at  least  in  relation  to' foreign  sov- 
ereigns, is,  that  on  that  supposition  only,  foreign  governments 
would  be  willing  or  expected  to  maintain  international  rela- 
tions with  the  United  States.  Let  it  be  understood  that  the 
Government  at  Washington  was  not  a  National  Government, 
representing  a  sovereign  authority;  and  that  Hie  sovereignly 
resided  absolutely  and  exclusively  in  the  several  States,  as  the 
only  sovereigns  and  nations  in  our  political  system,  and  the 
diplomatic  functionaries  at  the  seat  of  the  Federal  Government 
would  be  obliged  to  close  their  communications  with  the  Secre- 
tary of  State,  and  with  new  commissions  repair  to  Columbia,  in 
South  Carolina,  and  other  seats  of  the  S(ate  governments. 
They  could  no  longer,  as  the  representatives  of  a  sovereign  au- 
thority, hold  intercourse  with  a  functionary  who  was  but  the 
agent  of  a  self-called  government,  which  was  itself  but  an  agent 
representing  no  sovereign  authority;  nor  of  the  States  as  separ- 
ate sovereignties,  nor  a  sovereignty  in  the  United  States  which 
had  no  existence.  For  a  like  reason,  the  plenipotentiaries  of 
the  United  States  at  foreign  courts  would  be  obliged  to  return 
home  unless  commissioned  by  the  individual  States.  With  re- 
spect to  foreign  nations,  the  confederacy  of  the  States  was  held 
de  facto  to  be  a  nation,  or  other  nations  would  not  have  held 
national  relations  with  it. 

There  is  one  view  of  the  subject  which  ought  to  have  its  in- 
fluence on  those  who  espouse  doctrines  which  strike  at  the  au- 
thoritative origin  and  efficacious  operation  of  the  Government 
of  the  United  States.  The  Government  of  the  United  States, 
like  all  governments  free  in  their  principles,  rests  on  compact; 
a  compact,  not  between  the  government  and  the  parties  who 
formed  and  live  under  it,  but  among  the  parties  themselves;  and 
the  strongest  of  governments  are  those  in  which  the  compacts 
were  most  fairly  formed  and  most  faithfully  executed. 

Now  all  must  agree  that  the  compact  in  the  case  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  was  duly  formed,  and  by  a  competent  authority.  It 
was  formed,  in  fact,  by  the  people  of  the  several  States  in  their 
highest  sovereign  authority;   an  authority  which  could  have 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  423 

made  the  compact  a  mere  league,  or  a  consolidation  of  all  en- 
tirely into  one  community.  Such  was  their  authority  if  such 
had  been  their  will.  It  was  their  will  to  prefer  to  either  the 
constitutional  Government  now  existing;  and  this  being  unde- 
niably established  by  a  competent  and  even  the  highest  human 
authority,  it  follows  that  the  obligation  to  give  it  all  the  effect 
to  which  any  government  could  be  entitled,  whatever  the  mode 
of  its  formation,  is  equally  undeniable.  Had  it  been  formed  by 
the  people  of  the  United  States  as  one  society,  the  authority 
could  not  have  been  more  competent  than  that  which  did  form 
it,  nor  would  a  consolidation  of  the  people  of  the  States  into 
one  people  be  different  in  validity  or  operation,  if  made  by  the 
aggregate  authority  of  the  people  of  the  States,  than  if  made  by 
the  plenary  sanction  given  concurrently,  as  it  was  in  their  high- 
est sovereign  capacity.  The  government,  whatever  it  be,  re- 
sulting from  either  of  these  processes,  would  rest  on  an  author- 
ity equally  competent,  and  be  equally  obligatory  and  operative 
on  those  over  whom  it  was  established.  Nor  would  it  be  in 
any  respect  less  responsible,  theoretically  and  practically,  to 
the  constituent  body,  in  the  one  hypothesis  than  in  the  other, 
or  less  subject  in  extreme  cases  to  be  overthrown.  The  faith 
pledged  in  the  compact  being  the  vital  principle  of  all  free 
government,  that  is  the  true  text  by  which  political  right  and 
wrong  are  to  be  decided,  and  the  resort  to  physical  force  justi- 
fied, whether  applied  to  the  enforcement  or  the  subversion  of 
political  power. 

Whatever  be  the  mode  in  which  the  essential  authority  estab* 
lished  the  Constitution,  the  structure  of  this,  the  power  of  this, 
the  rules  of  exposition,  the  means  of  execution,  must  be  the 
same;  the  tendency  to  consolidation  or  dissolution  the  same. 
The  question  whether  ''we  the  people"  means  the  people  in  their 
aggregate  capacity,  acting  by  a  numerical  majority  of  the  whole, 
or  by  a  majority  in  each  of  all  the  States,  the  authority  being 
equally  valid  and  binding,  the  question  is  interesting  but  as  an 
historical  fact  of  merely  speculative  curiosity. 

Whether  the  centripetal  or  centrifugal  tendency  be  greatest, 
is  a  problem  which  experience  is  to  decide;  but  it  depends  not 


424  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1835-'6. 

on  the  mode  of  the  grant,  but  the  extent  and  effect  of  the  powers 
granted.  The  only  distinctive  circumstance  is  in  the  effect  of 
a  dissolution  of  the  system  on  the  resultum  [?]  of  the  parties, 
which,  in  the  case  of  a  system  formed  by  the  people,  as  that  of 
the  United  States  was,  would  replace  the  States  in  the  character 
of  separate  communities,  whereas  a  system  founded  by  the  peo- 
ple, as  one  community,  would,  on  its  dissolution,  throw  the  peo- 
ple into  a  state  of  nature.* 

In  conclusion,  those  who  deny  the  possibility  of  a  political 
system,  with  a  divided  sovereignty  like  that  of  the  United  States, 
must  choose  between  a  government  purely  consolidated  and  an 
association  of  governments  purely  federal.  All  republics  of  the 
former  character,  ancient  or  modern,  have  been  found  inefficient 
for  order  and  justice  within,  and  for  security  without.  They 
have  been  either  a  prey  to  internal  convulsions  or  to  foreign  in- 
vasions. In  like  manner  all  confederacies,  ancient  or  modern, 
have  been  either  dissolved  by  the  inadequacy  of  their  cohesion, 
or,  as  in  the  modern  examples,  continue  to  be  monuments  of  the 
frailty  of  such  forms.  Instructed  by  these  monitory  lessons,  and 
by  the  failure  of  an  experiment  of  their  own,  (an  experiment 
which,  while  it  proved  the  frailty  of  mere  federalism,  proved 
also  the  frailties  of  republicanism  without  the  control  of  a  fed- 
eral organization,)  thef  United  States  have  adopted  a  modifica- 
tion of  political  power,  which  aims  at  such  a  distribution  of  it 
as  might  avoid  as  well  the  evils  of  consolidation  as  the  defects 
of  federation,  and  obtain  the  advantages  of  both.  Thus  far, 
throughout  a  period  of  nearly  half  a  century,  the  new  and  com- 
pound system  has  been  successful  beyond  any  of  the  forms  of 
government,  ancient  or  modern,  with  which  it  may  be  compared, 
having  as  yet  discovered  no  defects  which  do  not  admit  remedies 


*  See  letter  of  J.  M.  to  D.  Webster,  of  March  15,  1833.     Ante,  293. 

f  The  known  existence  of  this  control  has  a  silent  influence,  which  is  not  suffi- 
ciently adverted  to  in  our  political  discussions,  and  which  has  doubtless  prevented 
collisions  in  cases  which  might  otherwise  have  threatened  the  fabric  of  the  Union. 
Another  preventive  resource  is  in  the  fact  noted  by  Montesquieu,  that  if  one  mem- 
ber of  a  union  become  diseased,  it  is  cured  by  the  examples  and  the  frowns  of 
the  others,  before  the  contagion  can  spread. 


1835-'6.  NULLIFICATION.  425 

compatible  with  its  vital  principles  and  characteristic  features. 
It  becomes  all,  therefore,  who  are  friends  of  a  government  based 
on  free  principles,  to  reflect,  that  by  denying-  the  possibility  of  a 
system  partly  federal  and  partly  consolidated,  and  who  would 
convert  ours  into  one  either  wholly  federal  or  wholly  consoli- 
dated, iu  neither  of  which  forms  have  individual  rights,  public 
order,  and  external  safety  been  all  duly  maintained,  they  aim  a 
deadly  blow  at  the  last  hope  of  true  liberty  on  the  face  of  the 
earth.     Its  enlightened  votaries  must  perceive  the  necessity  of 
such  a  modification  of  power  as  will  not  only  divide  it  between 
the  whole  and  the  parts,  but  provide  for  occurring  questions  as 
well  between  the  whole  and  the  parts  as  between  the  parts  them- 
selves.    A  political  system  which  docs  not  contain  an  effective 
provision  for  a  peaceable  decision  of  all  controversies  arising 
within  itself,  would  be  a  government  in  name  only.    Such  a  pro- 
vision is  obviously  essential;  and  it  is  equally  obvious  that  it 
cannot  be  either  peaceable  or  effective  by  making  every  part  an 
authoritative  empire.    The  final  appeal  in  such  cases  must  be  to 
the  authority  of  the  whole,  not  to  that  of  the  parts  separately 
and  independently.     This  was  the  view  taken  of  the  subject 
while  the  Constitution  was  under  the  consideration  of  the  peo- 
ple.*   It  was  this  view  of  it  which  dictated  the  clause  declaring 
that  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States  should  be 
the  supreme  law  of  the  land,  anything  in  the  constitution  or 
laws  of  any  of  the  States  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. f    It 
was  the  same  view  which  specially  prohibited  certain  powers 
and  acts  to  the  States,  among  them  any  laws  violating  the  obli- 
gation of  contracts,  and  which  dictated  the  appellate  provision 
in  the  judicial  act  passed  by  the  first  Congress  under  the  Con- 
stitution.^:    And  it  may  be  confidently  foretold,  that  notwith- 
standing the  clouds  which  a  patriotic  jealousy  or  other  causes 
have  at  times  thrown  over  the  subject,  it  is  the  view  which  will 
be  permanently  taken  of  it,  with  a  surprise  hereafter  that  any 
other  should  ever  have  been  contended  for. 

*  See  Federalist,  No.  xxxix.  t  See  Article  vi.  $  See  Article  i. 


426  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1836. 


TO   WILLIAM    C.    RIVES. 

Jan*  26,  1836. 

Dear  Sir, — I  return  with  thanks  the  papers  you  kindly  fa- 
vored me  with  an  opportunity  of  perusing.  They  are  not  with- 
out interest,  though  superseded  by  the  mass  of  information  now 
before  the  public.  I  am  sorry  to  find  from  this  that  so  much 
uncertainty  still  clouds  the  issue  of  the  controversy  with  France. 
Should  it  fail  of  an  amicable  adjustment  by  the  parties  them- 
selvesyit  is  quite  possible  that  Great  Britain  may  see  in  some 
of  the  consequences  of  a  war  between  them,  injuries  overbalan- 
cing the  incidental  advantages  accruing  to  herself,  and  success- 
fully interpose  her  friendly  offices.  The  spectacle  in  that  case 
would  be  as  marvellous  as  the  state  of  things  which  led  to  it. 


TO    CALEB    CUSHING. 

Montpellier,  Feb''  9,  1836. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  3d  instant,  in 
closing  a  copy  of  your  speech  on  the  right  of  petition,  &c,  which 
certainly  contains  very  able  and  interesting  views  of  the  sub- 
ject. I  do  not  wonder  at  your  difficulty  in  understanding  the 
import  of  the  passage  cited  from  my  speech  in  the  first  Con- 
gress under  the  present  Constitution,  being  myself  at  a  loss  for 
its  precise  meaning,  obscured  as  it  is  by  the  vagueness  of  some 
of  its  language  and  the  omission,  which  my  memory  cannot  sup- 
ply, of  the  "critical  review"  of  the  subject  referred  to,  which, 
if  not  omitted,  would  probably  have  removed  the  obscurity. 

Whilst  I  am  fully  aware  that  in  the  commendations  bestowed 
on  the  career  of  my  political  life,  you  have  done  me  far  more 
than  justice,  I  cannot  be  insensible  to  the  kind  partiality  from 
which  it  proceeded;  with  my  recognition  of  which  I  pray  you  to 
accept  assurances  of  my  cordial  respects  and  good  wishes. 


1836.  LETTERS.  427 

TO   COMMITTEE   OF   CINCINNATI. 

February  20,  1836. 

I  have  received,  fellow-citizens,  your  letter  inviting  me  to  a 
public  dinner  at  Cincinnati  on  the  4th  of  March,  to  celebrate 
the  expiration,  on  the  preceding  day,  of  the  charter  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  Bank;  and  requesting  from  me,  if  unable  to  attend, 
an  appropriate  sentiment  to  be  given  in  my  name  by  the  com- 
pany. 

Retaining,  as  I  do,  my  conviction,  heretofore  officially  and 
otherwise  expressed,  that  in  expounding  the  Constitution  in  the 
case  of  the  Bank,  the  decision  of  the  nation  had  been  sufficiently 
manifested  to  overrule  individual  opinions,  and  to  sanction  the 
power  exercised  in  establishing  such  an  institution,  I  cannot 
fail  to  be  excused  for  declining  to  participate  in  a  protest  against 
it,  as  destitute  of  constitutional  authority. 

For  the  favourable  and  friendly  sentiments  expressed  in  your 
letter,  I  tender  you  my  acknowledgments,  with  assurances  of 
my  great  respect  and  good  wishes. 


TO   JOSEPH   WOOD. 

Feb*  27,  1836. 

I  have  received,  sir,  your  letter  of  the  16th  instant,  request- 
ing such  information  as  I  might  be  able  to  give  pertaining  to  a 
biography  of  your  father-in-law,  the  late  Chief  Justice  Ells- 
worth. 

My  acquaintance  with  him  was  limited  to  the  periods  of  our 
cotemporary  services  in  public  life,  and  to  the  occasional  inter- 
course incident  to  it.  As  we  happened  to  be  thrown  but  little 
into  the  familiar  situations  which  develop  the  features  of  per- 
sonal and  social  character,  I  can  say  nothing  particular  as  to 
either — certainly  nothing  that  would  be  unfavorable.  Of  his 
public  character  I  may  say,  that  I  always  regarded  his  talents 
as  of  a  high  order,  and  that  they  were  generally  so  regarded. 
As  a  speaker  his  reasoning  was  clear  and  close,  and  delivered 


428  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1836. 

in  a  style  and  tone  which  rendered  it  emphatic  and  impressive. 
In  the  Convention  which  framed  the  Constitution  of  the  U. 
States  he  Lore  an  interesting  part,  and  signed  the  instrument  in 
its  final  shape,  with  the  cordiality  verified  by  the  support  he 
gave  to  its  ratification.  "Whilst  we  were  cotemporaries  in  the 
early  sessions  of  Congress,  he  in  the  Senate  and  I  in  the  House 
of  Representatives,  it  was  well  understood  that  he  was  an  able 
and  operative  member.  It  may  be  taken  for  certain,  I  believe, 
that  the  bill  organizing  the  Judicial  Department  originated  in 
his  draft,  and  that  it  was  not  materially  changed  in  its  passage 
into  a  law.  The  journals  of  the  session  may  be  properly  con- 
sulted on  this  as  on  other  subjects  in  which  he  participated.  Of 
his  legal  and  judicial  capacities,  the  proper  test  must  be  in  the 
record  and  reports  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
whilst  he  presided  in  it.  With  these  I  have  never  had  occasion 
to  make  myself  particularly  acquainted. 

No  epistolary  correspondence  having  ever  passed  between  us, 
my  files  of  course  contain  nothing  of  that  sort,  nor  is  there 
among  my  papers  a  single  manuscript  from  him,  of  any  sort. 

I  am  very  sensible,  sir,  that  these  brief  remarks  must  be  con- 
sidered rather  as  a  proof  of  my  respect  for  the  object  of  your 
request  than  as  a  satisfactory  compliance  with  it.  Such  as  they 
are  I  tender  them,  with  a  confidence  that  your  resort  to  other 
sources  of  aid  to  your  undertaking  will  be  of  more  avail  to  you. 


to . 

March,  1836. 

Dear  Sir, — The  letter  of  Mr.  Leigh  to  the  General  Assembly 
presents  some  interesting  views  of  its  important  subject,  and 
furnishes  an  excuse  for  reflections  not  inapposite  to  the  present 
juncture. 

The  precise  obligation  imposed  on  a  representative  by  the  in- 
structions of  his  constituents  still  divides  the  opinions  of  dis- 
tinguished statesmen.  This  is  the  case  in  Great  Britain,  where 
such  topics  have  been  most  discussed.     It  is  also  now  the  case, 


183G.  LETTERS.  429 

more  or  less,  here,  and  was  so  at  the  first  Congress  under  the 
present  Constitution,  as  appears  from  the  register  of  debates, 
imperfectly  as  they  were  reported. 

It  being  agreed  by  all,  that  whether  an  instruction  be  obeyed 
or  disobeyed,  the  act  of  the  representative  is  equally  valid  and 
operative,  the  question  is  a  moral  one  between  the  representa- 
tive and  his  constituents.  If  satisfied  that  the  instruction  ex- 
presses the  will  of  his  constituents,  it  must  be  with  the  repre- 
sentative to  decide  whether  he  will  conform  to  an  instruction 
opposed  to  his  judgment,  or  will  incur  their  displeasure  by  dis- 
obeying it;  with  them  to  decide  in  what  mode  they  will  manifest 
their  displeasure.  In  a  case  necessarily  appealing  to  the  con- 
science of  the  representative,  its  paramount  dictates  must,  of 
course,  be  his  guide. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  equality  of  the  States  in  the  Federal 
Senate  was  a  compromise  between  the  larger  and  the  smaller 
States,  the  former  claiming  a  proportional  representation  in 
both  branches  of  the  Legislature,  as  due  to  their  superior  popu- 
lation; the  latter  an  equality  in  both,  as  a  safeguard  to  the  re- 
served sovereignty  of  the  States,  an  object  which  obtained  the 
concurrence  of  members  from  the  larger  States.  But  it  is 
equally  true,  though  but  little  adverted  to  as  an  instance  of  mis- 
calculating speculation,  that,  as  soon  as  the  smaller  States  had 
secured  more  than  a  proportional  share  in  the  proposed  Gov- 
ernment, they  became  favourable  to  augmentations  of  its  powers, 
and  that,  under  the  administration  of  the  Government,  they  have 
generally,  in  contests  between  it  and  the  State  governments, 
leaned  to  the  former.  Whether  the  direct  effect  of  instructions 
which  would  make  the  Senators  dependent  on  the  pleasure  of 
their  constituents,  or  the  indirect  effect  inferred  from  such  a 
tenure  by  Mr.  Leigh,  would  be  most  favourable  to  the  General 
Government  or  the  State  governments,  is  a  question  which,  not 
being  tested  by  practice,  is  left  to  individual  opinions.  My  an- 
ticipations, I  confess,  do  not  accord  with  that  in  the  letter. 

Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  the  tenure  of  the  Senate 
was  meant  as  an  obstacle  to  the  instability,  which  not  only  his- 
tory, but  the  experience  of  our  country,  had  shown  to  be  the 


430  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1836. 

besetting  infirmity  of  popular  governments.  Innovations,  there- 
fore, impairing  the  stability  afforded  by  that  tenure,  without 
some  compensating  remodification  of  the  powers  of  the  Govern- 
ment, must  affect  the  balance  contemplated  by  the  Constitu- 
tion. 

My  prolonged  life  has  made  me  a  witness  of  the  alternate 
popularity  and  unpopularity  of  eacli  of  the  great  branches  of 
the  Federal  Government.  I  have  witnessed,  also,  the  vicissi- 
tudes, in  the  apparent  tendencies  in  the  Federal  and  State  gov- 
ernments to  encroach  each  on  the  authorities  of  the  other,  with- 
out being  able  to  infer  with  certainty  what  would  be  the  final 
operation  of  the  causes  as  heretofore  existing;  while  it  is  far 
more  difficult  to  calculate  the  mingled  and  checkered  influences 
on  the  future  from  an  expanding  territorial  domain;  from  the 
multiplication  of  the  parties  to  the  Union;  from  the  great  and 
growing  power  of  not  a  few  of  them;  from  the  absence  of  exter- 
nal danger;  from  combinations  of  States  in  some  quarters  and 
collisions  in  others,  and  from  questions  incident  to  a  refusal  of 
unsuccessful  parties  to  abide  by  the  issue  of  controversies  judi- 
cially decided.  To  these  uncertainties  may  be  added  the 
effects  of  a  dense  population,  and  the  multiplication  and  the 
varying  relations  of  the  classes  composing  it.  I  am  far, 
however,  from  desponding  of  the  great  political  experiment  in 
the  hands  of  the  American  people.  Much  has  already  been 
gained  in  its  favour  by  the  continued  prosperity  accompanying 
it  through  a  period  of  so  many  years.  Much  may  be  expected 
from  the  progress  and  diffusion  of  political  science  in  dissipa- 
ting errors,  opposed  to  the  sound  principles  which  harmonize 
different  interests;  from  the  geographical,  commercial,  and  so- 
cial ligaments,  strengthened  as  they  arc  by  mechanical  improve- 
ments, giving  so  much  advantage  to  time  over  space;  and,  above 
all,  by  the  obvious  and  inevitable  consequences  of  the  wreck  of 
an  ark,  bearing,  as  we  have  flattered  ourselves,  the  happiness 
of  our  country  and  the  hope  of  the  world.  Nor  is  it  unworthy 
of  consideration,  that  the  four  great  religious  sects,  running 
through  all  the  States,  will  oppose  an  event  placing  parts  of 
each  under  separate  governments. 


1836.  LETTERS.  431 

It  cannot  bo  denied  that  there  are,  in  the  aspect  our  country 
present?,  phenomena  of  an  ill  omen;  but  it  would  seem  that 
they  proceed  from  a  coincidence  of  causes,  some  transitory, 
others  fortuitous,  rarely  if  ever  likely  to  recur;  that,  of  the 
causes  more  durable,  some  can  be  greatly  mitigated,  if  not  re- 
moved, by  the  legislative  authority;  and  such  as  may  require 
and  be  worthy  the  "intersit"*  of  a  higher  power  can  be  pro- 
vided for  whenever,  if  ever,  the  public  mind  may  be  calm  and 
cool  enough  for  that  resort. 


TO   C.    FENIMORE   WILLISTON. 

March  19,  1836. 
I  have  received,  sir,  your  letter  of  the  9th,  and  am  sorry  that 
I  cannot  give  you  the  information  it  requests;  nor  can  I  refer 
you  to  the  source  from  which  it  may  be  most  conveniently  and 
successfully  sought.  I  do  not  possess  a  copy  of  the  printed 
correspondence  between  Mr.  Jeremy  Bentham  and  myself  on 
the  subject  of  his  proposed  "  Codification  for  the  U.  States," 
nor  even  the  original  transcript  of  my  part  of  it,  for  which  I 
am  at  a  loss  to  account.  His  letter  to  me  covers  21  folio  pages, 
closely  written.  That  the  correspondence  ''with  others  relating 
to  the  subject  of  American  Codification"  was  printed  in  England 

in  a  Tract  entitled  "— — — — "  appears 

from  Mr.  Bentham's  Address  in  eight  letters  "to  the  citizens  of 
the  several  U.  States,"  in  which  it  is  mentioned,  also,  that  the 
tract  was  forwarded  to  the  Governors  of  the  States,  and  that 
Mr.  J.  Q.  Adams  had  taken  charge  of  the  whole.  The  archives 
of  the  States  seem,  therefore,  the  resort  first  presenting  itself. 

*  Nee  Deus  intersit,  nisi  dignus  vindice  nodus 
'     Incident.    Eorat  Ep.  ad  Pis.,  191. 


432  WORKS    OF    MAD  IS  OX.  1830. 

TO   W.    C.   RIVES. 

Montpellier,  April  19*1830. 

Dear  Str, — I  have  received  the  copy  of  your  speech  on  the 
28th  of  March.  It  is  the  only  one  I  have  read  on  the  subject. 
It  contains  strong  points,  strongly  sustained.  I  cannot  lmt 
think,  however,  that  the  preservation  of  the  original  journals 
of  the  Legislature  is  undervalued;  printed  copies  of  transitory 
proceedings  being  generally  neglected  by  the  possessors — the 
more  so,  the  greater  the  number  of  them  circulated — and  when 
not  lost,  always  so  dispersed  as  to  be  often  inaccessible;  while 
an  original  record  known  to  exist  in  a  central  repository  can 
always  be  consulted  for  public  or  private  purposes;  an  advan- 
tage improvable  by  adding  other  repositories,  selected  as  safe- 
guards against  casualties,  and  for  a  more  convenient  resort. 

In  the  late  republication  of  the  journals  of  the  House  of  Del- 
egates, much  difficulty  and  delay  was  experienced  in  collecting 
printed  copies,  and  I  believe  that  the  journals  of  one  session 
were  never  obtained.  The  case  was  far  worse  with  the  jour- 
nals of  the  Senate,  of  which  republication  was  not  attempted. 

The  increasing  pressure  of  my  infirmities  obliges  me  to  dic- 
tate this  acknowledgment  of  your  kind  attention  to  another 
pen,  instead  of  employing  my  own,  in  the  clumsy  state  of  my 
fingers. 

Mrs.  Madison  joins  me  in  respectful  salutations  to  yourself 
and  Mrs.  Rives,  who  we  understand  is  now  with  you,  and  in  as- 
surances of  our  cordial  regards  and  best  wishes  for  you  both. 

TO  B.   W.   LEIGH. 

Montpellier,  May  1.  1.^30. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  a  copy  of  your  speech  on  the  4th 
and  5th  of  April,  and  on  the  supposition  that  I  may  be  indebted 
for  it  to  your  politeness,  I  tender  you  my  acknowledgments  ac- 
cordingly. 

*  At  this  date,  it  is  deemed  proper  to  notice  a  letter,  signed,  ««  James  Madison," 
copied  from  Ruffin's  "Farmer's  Register"  into  Xiles'.i  Weekly  Register  for  July 
2,  1836,  [Vol.  50,  p  298.]  and,  in  the  Index  (p  vi.)  to  that  volume,  attributed  to 
Ex-President  Madison.     The  letter  is  dated  "  Richmond.  March  2V.  1836. 

Its  diction  is  sufficiently  in  contrast  with  the  terse  and  graceful  English,  which 
was  habitual  with  the  Ex-President,  both  in  writing  and  in  conversation,  to 
disprove  the  hasty  and  inadvertent  supposition  that  the  letter  was  his.     To  thia 


1836.  LETTERS.  433 

The  increasing  pressure  of  my  infirmities  lias  of  late  rendered 
my  attention  to  the  public  proceedings  very  superficial.  To  the 
expunging  question  I  have  paid  very  little.  The  views  taken 
in  your  speech  of  some,  at  least,  of  its  branches  appear  "sans 
repMque."  It  is  clear,  I  think,  that  a  preservation  of  the  origi- 
nal journals  derives,  from  their  legal  authenticity  and  constant 
accessibility  at  a  known  spot  for  public  or  private  purposes,  a 
peculiar  value;  the  liability  of  printed  copies  to  dispersion, 
if  not  entire  loss,  being  inconvenient  for  research,  if  to  be  found 
at  all.  The  late  republication  of  the  Legislative  journals  of 
Virginia  furnishes  examples  of  both.  Those  of  one  session  were 
left  a  blank,  and  it  was  not  without  much  difficulty  and  delay 
that  the  imperfect  set  was  finally  obtained. 

I  pray  you,  sir,  to  accept,  with  the  assurance  of  my  esteem, 
my  best  wishes. 

TO    C.    FENIMORE   WILLISTON. 

May  13,  1836. 

I  have  received,  sir,  your  letter  of  the  6th.  I  know  of  no 
propositions  to  codify  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  or  of  any 
particular  State,  on  the  plan  of  Mr.  Bentham,  other  than  those 
made  by  Mr.  B.  himself.  Most  of  the  States  have  doubtless  re- 
vised their  laws,  with  a  view  to  their  general  improvement,  and 
adaptation  of  them  to  the  change  of  Government  by  the  Declar- 
ation of  Independence.  Such  were  the  objects  of  Virginia  in 
her  revised  code,  prepared  immediately  after  that  event.  The 
work  has  been  long  out  of  print  and  perhaps  may  not  easily  be 
found.  The  particular  task  executed  by  Mr.  Livingston  on  the 
subject  of  penal  laws  is  probably  not  unknown  to  you.  In  my 
very  feeble  condition,  in  the  86th  year  of  my  age,  and  with  se- 
rious inroads  on  my  health,  I  must  be  pardoned  for  referring 
you  to  other  sources  for  answers  to  your  enquiries.  At  Wash- 
ington there  are  individuals  from  every  State  who  can  readily 
answer  such. 

internal  evidence,  of  itself  conclusive,  may  be  added  the  ascertained  fact,  that  at 
the  date  of  the  letter  he  was  at  his  home  in  Orange  County,  Va.,  to  which  he 
had  long  been  confined  by  bodily  infirmities,   attended  by  great  suffering,  and 
where  he  constantly  remained  till  his  death  on  the  28th  of  June,  1836. 
VOL.  IV.  28 


434  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1836. 

TO   G.   J.   INGERSOLL. 

Montpelmer,  May  li,  1836. 

Sir, — Mr.  Madison  being  at  present  too  much  indisposed 
to  use  his  own  pen,  desires  me  to  acknowledge  the  receipt 
of  your  letter  of  the  9th  instant,  and  to  thank  you  for  your 
friendly  solicitude  on  the  subject  of  his  health.  I  am  sorry  to 
say  that  the  change  in  it  since  you  left  Montpelier  has  not  been 
favorable.  You  need  not  be  assured  of  the  pleasure  he  always 
feels  in  the  sqciety  of  his  friends,  especially  the  most  intelligent 
and  enlightened  of  them,  when  his  condition  permits  him  to  en- 
joy it. 

Xo  favorable  moment,  he  thinks,  ought  to  be  omitted  to  press 
on  G.  Britain  a  settlement  of  the  great  questions  of  free  goods 
and  free  sailors  in  the  neutral  vessels,  blockades,  contraband  of 
war.  &c.  He  recollects  that  a  letter  to  you  some  years  ago 
sketched  the  grounds  on  which  the  principle,  "free  ships  free 
goods,"  might  even  then  claim,  as  de  jure,  to  be  a  law  of  na- 
tions; and  in  the  present  state  of  the  world,  with  the  prospect 
of  an  American  navy  which  will  equal  hers  in  a  few  years,  she 
can  no  longer  hope  to  continue  mistress  of  the  seas.  The  Tri- 
dent, if  there  be  one,  must  pass  to  this  hemisphere,  where  it  may 
be  hoped  it  will  be  less  abused  than  it  has  been  on  the  other. 
The  effects  of  a  due  reform  of  belligerent  claims  on  the  ocean 
will  change  essentially  the  relations  between  them  and  neutrals, 
and  make  the  latter,  not  the  former,  the  gainers  in  time  of  war. 
On  the  subject  of  Blockades,  a  communication  of  the  British 
Government  brought  by  Mr.  Merry  came  fully  up  to  our  de- 
mand-. It  resulted  from  our  protest  against  a  spurious  block- 
ade of  the  Islands  of  Martinique  and  Guadalupe,  by  Admiral 
Duckworth.  The  case  merits  a  resort  for  an  explanation  of  it 
to  the  records  and  files  in  the  Department  of  State.  Mrs.  Mad- 
ison, with  her  niece  and  son,  beg  to  be  united  in  the  expression 
of  all  the  good  wishes  felt  at  Montpelier  for  yourself  and  Miss 
Jngersoll. 

J.  C.  PAYNE. 


1836.  LETTERS.  435 


TO   JOHN   ROBERTSON. 

J.  Madison,  with  his  best  respects  to  Mr.  Robertson,  thanks 
him  for  the  copy  of  his  speech  delivered  in  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives on  the  5th  and  6th  of  April. 

In  his  present  condition,  the  combined  effect  of  his  very  ad- 
vanced age,  and  of  indisposition  much  increased  within  a  short 
period,  he  has  been  able  to  make  himself  but  slightly  acquainted 
with  some  of  the  subjects  embraced  in  the  speech.  He  may 
safely  say  that  it  is  characterized  by  much  ability  in  the  views 
taken  of  many  of  them;  and  the  aspect  presented  by  some  is 
deeply  interesting  to  the  career  of  our  political  system.  On  the 
distribution  of  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands  the  speech  ap- 
pears to  be  entirely  successful  in  shewing  that  the  bill  in  its 
present  form  encounters  no  insuperable  difficulties,  and  that  the 
fund  is  rightfully  owned  by  the  people  of  the  Union  unless  it  be 
without  an  owner. 
Montpellier,  May  23d,  1836. 


TO   GEORGE   TUCKER. 

June  27,  1836. 

My  dear  Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  June  17th,  with 
the  paper  enclosed  in  it. 

Apart  from  the  value  put  on  such  a  mark  of  respect  from  you 
in  a  dedication  of  your  "  Life  of  Mr.  Jefferson  "  to  me,  I  could 
only  be  governed  in  accepting  it  by  my  confidence  in  your  ca- 
pacity to  do  justice  to  a  character  so  interesting  to  his  country 
and  to  the  world;  and,  I  may  be  permitted  to  add,  with  whose 
principles  of  liberty  and  political  career  mine  have  been  so 
extensively  congenial. 

It  could  not  escape  me  that  a  feeling  of  personal  friendship 
has  mingled  itself  greatly  with  the  credit  you  allow  to  my  pub- 
lic services.  I  am,  at  the  same  time,  justified  by  my  conscious- 
ness in  saying,  that  an  ardent  zeal  was  always  felt  to  make  up 
for  deficiences  in  them  by  a  sincere  and  steadfast  co-operation  in 


430  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1836. 

promoting  such  a  reconstruction  of  our  political  system  as  would 
provide  for  the  permanent  liberty  and  happiness  of  the  United 
States;  and  that  of  the  many  good  fruits  it  has  produced  which 
have  well  rewarded  the  efforts  and  anxieties  that  led  to  it,  no 
one  has  been  a  more  rejoicing  witness  than  myself. 

With  cordial  salutations  on  the  near  approach  to  the  end  of 
your  undertaking,  &c. 


MISCELLANEOUS  WRITINGS. 


ADVICE  TO  MY  COUNTRY. 


As  this  advice,  if  it  ever  see  the  light,  will  not  do  so  till  I  am 
no  more,  it  may  be  considered  as  issuing  from  the  tomb,  where 
truth  alone  can  be  respected,  and  the  happiness  of  man  alone 
consulted.  It  will  be  entitled,  therefore,  to  whatever  weight 
can  be  derived  from  good  intentions,  and  from  the  experience 
of  one  who  has  served  his  Country  in  various  stations  through 
a  period  of  forty  years;  who  espoused  in  his  youth,  and  adhered 
through  his  life,  to  the  cause  of  its  liberty;  and  who  has  borne 
a  part  in  most  of  the  great  transactions  which  will  constitute 
epochs  of  its  destiny. 

The  advice  nearest  to  my  heart  and  deepest  in  my  convictions 

is,  THAT  THE  UNION  OP  THE  STATES  BE  CHERISHED  AND  PERPET- 
UATED, Let  the  open  enemy  to  it  be  regarded  as  a  Pan- 
dora WITH  HER  BOX  OPENED,  AND  THE  DISGUISED  ONE  AS  THE 
SERPENT  CREEPING  WITH  HIS  DEADLY  WILES  INTO  PARADISE. 


APPENDIX  II. 


Instructions  to  Dr.  Franklin  and  Mr.  Jay  concerning  the  Free  Nav- 
igation of  the  Mississippi,  &c. 

On  the  4th  of  October,  1780,  Congress  unanimously  resolved  that  Mr.  Jay 
should  adhere  to  his  former  instructions  respecting  the  right  to  the  free  naviga- 
tion of  the  Mississippi  river  ;  and  to  the  boundaries  of  the  United  States  as  already 
fixed  by  Congress.  On  the  Gth  of  October  Mr.  Madison,  Mr.  Sullivan,  and  Mr. 
Duane  were  appointed  a  committee  "  to  draft  a  letter  to  the  Ministers  of  the 
United  States  at  the  Courts  of  Versailles  and  Madrid  to  enforce  the  instructions 
given  to  Mr.  Jay  on  the  4th  instant,  and  to  explain  the  reasons  and  principlea 
on  which  the  same  are  founded,  that  they  may  respectively  be  enabled  to  satisfy 
those  Courts  of  the  justice  and  equity  of  the  intentions  of  Congress."  On  the  17th 
of  October  the  committee  reported  a  draft,  written  by  Mr.  Madison,  which  was 
agreed  to  as  follows : 

Sir, — Congress  having,  in  their  instructions  of  the  4th  instant,  directed  you 
to  adhere  strictly  to  their  former  instructions  relating  to  the  boundaries  of  the 
United  States,  to  insist  on  the  navigation  of  the  Mississippi  for  the  citizens  of 
the  United  States  in  common  with  the  subjects  of  his  Catholic  Majesty,  as, 
also,  on  a  free  port  or  ports  below  the  northern  limit  of  West  Florida,  and  ac- 
cessible to  merchant  ships  for  the  use  of  the  former,  and  being  sensible  of  the 
influence  which  these  claims  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  may  have  on 
your  negotiations  with  the  Court  of  Madrid,  have  thought  it  expedient  to  ex- 
plain the  reasons  and  principles  on  which  the  same  are  founded,  that  you  may 
be  enabled  to  satisfy  that  Court  of  the  equity  and  justice  of  their  intentions. 

With  respect  to  the  first  of  these  articles,  by  which  the  river  Mississippi  is 
fixed  as  the  boundary  between  the  Spanish  settlements  and  the  United  States, 
it  is  unnecessary  to  take  notice  of  any  pretensions  founded  on  a  priority  of  dis- 
covery, of  occupancy,  or  on  conquest.  It  is  sufficient  that  by  the  definitive 
treaty  of  Paris,  of  1763,  article  seventh,  all  the  territory  now  claimed  by  the 
United  States  was  expressly  and  irrevocably  ceded  to  the  King  of  Great  Brit, 
ain ;  and  that  the  United  States  are,  in  consequence  of  the  revolution  in  their 
Government,  entitled  to  the  benefits  of  that  cession. 

The  first  of  these  positions  is  proved  by  the  treaty  itself.  To  prove  the  last, 
it  must  be  observed,  that  it  is  a  fundamental  principle  in  all  lawful  Govern- 
ments, and  particularly  in  the  constitution  of  the  British  empire,  that  all  the 
rights  of  sovereignty  are  intended  for  the  benefit  of  those  from  whom  they  are 


442  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1780. 

derived,  and  over  whom  they  are  exercised.  It  is  known,  also,  to  have  been 
held  for  an  inviolable  principle  by  the  United  States  while  they  remained  a 
part  of  the  British  empire,  that  the  sovereignty  of  the  King  of  England,  with 
all  the  rights  and  powers  included  in  it,  did  not  extend  to  them  in  virtue  of  his 
being  acknowledged  and  obeyed  as  King  by  the  people  of  England,  or  of  any 
other  part  of  the  empire,  but  in  virtue  of  his  being  acknowledged  and  obeyed 
as  King  of  [by  ?]  the  people  of  America  themselves;  and  that  this  principle 
was  the  basis,  first  of  their  opposition  to,  and  finally  of  their  abolition  of,  his 
authority  over  them.  From  these  principles  it  results,  that  all  the  territory 
lying  within  the  limits  of  the  States,  as  fixed  by  the  sovereign  himself,  was 
held  by  him  for  their  particular  benefits,  and  must,  equally  with  his  other 
rights  and  claims  in  quality  of  their  sovereign,  be  considered  as  having 
devolved  on  them,  in  consequence  of  their  resumption  of  the  sovereignty  to 
themselves. 

In  support  of  this  position  it  may  be  further  observed,  that  all  the  territorial 
rights  of  the  King  of  Great  Britain  within  the  limits  of  the  United  States  ac- 
crued to  him  from  the  enterprises,  the  risks,  the  sacrifices,  the  expense  in 
blood  and  treasure,  of  the  present  inhabitants  and  their  progenitors.  If  in 
latter  times  expenses  and  exertions  have  been  borne  by  any  other  part  of  the 
empire,  in  their  immediate  defence,  it  need  only  be  recollected  that  the  ulti- 
mate object  of  them  was  the  general  security  and  advantage  of  the  empire  ; 
that  a  proportional  share  was  borne  by  the  States  themselves;  and  that  if  this 
had  not  been  the  case,  the  benefits  resulting  from  an  exclusive  enjoyment  of 
their  trade  [would]  have  been  an  abundant  compensation.  Equity  aud  jus- 
tice, therefore,  perfectly  coincide  in  the  present  instance  with  political  and 
constitutional  principles. 

No  objection  can  be  pretended  against  what  is  here  said,  except  that  the 
King  of  Great  Britain  was,  at  the  time  of  the  rupture  with  his  Catholic  Majesty, 
possessed  of  certain  parts  of  the  territory  in  question,  and,  consequently,  that 
his  Catholic  Majesty  had,  and  still  has,  a  right  to  regard  them  as  lawful  ob- 
jects of  conquest.  In  answer  to  this  objection,  it  is  to  be  considered  :  1.  That 
these  possessions  are  few  in  number  and  confined  to  small  spots.  2.  That  a 
right  founded  on  conquest  being  only  coextensive  with  the  objects  of  conquest, 
cannot  comprehend  the  circumjacent  territory.  3.  That  if  a  right  to  the  said 
territory  depended  on  the  conquests  of  the  British  posts  within  it,  the  United 
States  have  already  a  more  extensive  claim  to  it  than  Spain  can  acquire,  hav- 
ing, by  the  success  of  their  arms,  obtained  possession  of  all  the  important  posts 
and  settlements  on  the  Illinois  and  Wabash,  rescued  the  inhabitants  from 
British  domination,  and  established  civil  Government  in  its  proper  form  over 
them.  They  have,  moreover,  established  a  post  on  a  strong  and  commanding 
situation  near  the  mouth  of  the  Ohio  ;  whereas,  Spain  has  a  claim  by  conquest 
to  no  post  above  the  northern  bounds  of  West  Florida,  except  that  of  the  Nat- 
chez, nor  are  there  any  other  British  posts  below  the  mouth  of  the  Ohio  for 
their  arms  to  be  employed  against.     4.  That  whatever  extent  ought  to  be  as- 


1780.  INSTRUCTIONS,    ETC.  443 

cribed  to  the  right  of  conquest,  it  must  be  admitted  to  have  limitations  which, 
in  the  present  case,  exclude  the  pretensions  of  his  Catholic  Majesty.  If  the 
occupation  by  the  King  of  Great  Britain  of  posts  within  the  limits  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  as  defined  by  charters  derived  from  the  said  King  when  constitu- 
tionally authorized  to  grant  them,  makes  them  lawful  objects  of  conquest  to 
any  other  power  than  the  United  States,  it  follows  that  every  other  part  of  the 
United  States  that  now  is  or  may  hereafter  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy 
is  equally  an  object  of  conquest.  Not  only  New  York,  Long  Island,  and  the 
other  islands  in  its  vicinity,  but  almost  the  entire  States  of  South  Carolina  and 
Georgia,  might,  by  the  interposition  of  a  foreign  Power  at  war  with  their  enemy, 
be  forever  severed  from  the  American  Confederacy,  and  subjected  to  a  foreign 
yoke.  But  is  such  a  doctrine  consonant  to  the  rights  of  nations  or  the  senti- 
ments of  humanity  ?  Does  it  breathe  that  spirit  of  concord  and  amity  which 
is  the  aim  of  the  proposed  alliance  with  Spain?  Would  it  be  admitted  by 
Spain  herself,  if  it  affected  her  own  dominions?  Were,  for  example,  a  British 
armament  by  a  sudden  enterprise  to  get  possession  of  a  sea-port,  a  trading 
town,  or  maritime  province  in  Spain,  and  another  Power  at  war  with  Britain 
should,  before  it  could  be  reconquered  by  Spain,  wrest  it  from  the  hands  of 
Britain,  would  Spain  herself  consider  it  as  an  extinguishment  of  her  just  pre- 
tensions ?  or  would  any  impartial  nation  consider  it  in  that  light  ?  As  to  the 
proclamation  of  the  King  of  Great  Britain  of  1763,  forbidding  his  Governors 
in  North  America  to  grant  lands  westward  of  the  sources  of  the  rivers  falling 
into  the  Atlantic  ocean,  it  can  by  no  rule  of  construction  militate  against  the 
present  claims  of  the  United  States.  That  proclamation,  as  is  clear  both  from 
the  title  and  tenor  of  it,  was  intended  merely  to  prevent  disputes  with  the  In- 
dians, and  an  irregular  appropriation  of  vacant  land  to  individuals ;  and  by  no 
means  either  to  renounce  any  parts  of  the  cessions  made  in  the  treaty  of  Paris, 
or  to  affect  the  boundaries  established  by  ancient  charters.  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  expressly  declared  that  the  lands  and  territory  prohibited  to  be  granted 
were  within  the  sovereignty  and  dominion  of  that  crown,  notwithstanding  the 
reservation  of  them  to  the  use  of  the  Indians. 

The  right  of  the  United  States  to  western  territory  as  far  as  the  Mississippi 
having  been  shown,  there  are  sufficient  reasons  for  them  to  insist  on  that  right, 
as  well  as  for  Spain  not  to  wish  a  relinquishment  of  it. 

In  the  first  place,  the  river  Mississippi  will  be  a  more  natural,  more  distin- 
guishable, and  more  precise  boundary  than  any  other  that  can  be  drawn  east- 
ward of  it;  and,  consequently,  will  be  less  liable  to  become  a  source  of  those 
disputes  which  too  often  proceed  from  uncertain  boundaries  between  nations. 

Secondly,  it  ought  not  to  be  concealed,  that  although  the  vacant  territory 
adjacent  to  the  Mississippi  should  be  relinquished  by  the  United  States  to 
Spain,  yet  the  fertility  of  its  soil  and  its  convenient  situation  for  trade  might 
be  productive  of  intrusions  by  the  citizens  of  the  former,  which  their  great  dis- 
tance would  render  it  difficult  to  restrain,  and  which  might  lead  to  an  inter- 


444  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1780. 

ruption  of  that  harmony  which  it  is  so  much  the  interest  and  wish  of  both 
should  be  perpetual. 

Thirdly,  as  this  territory  lies  within  the  charter  limits  of  particular  States, 
and  is  considered  by  them  as  no  less  their  property  than  any  other  territory 
within  their  limits.  Congress  could  not  relinquish  it  without  exciting  discus- 
sions between  themselves  and  those  States,  concerning  their  respective  rights 
and  powers,  which  might  greatly  embarrass  the  public  councils  of  the  United 
States,  and  give  advantage  to  the  common  enemy. 

Fourthlv,  the  territory  in  question  contains  a  number  of  inhabitants,  who 
are  at  present  under  the  protection  of  the  United  States,  and  have  sworn  alle- 
giance to  them.  These  could  not  by  voluntary  transfer  be  subjected  to  a  for- 
eign jurisdiction,  without  manifest  violation  of  the  common  rights  of  mankind, 
and  of  the  genius  and  principles  of  the  American  governments. 

Fifthly,  in  case  the  obstinacy  and  pride  of  Great  Britain  should  for  any 
length  of  time  continue  an  obstacle  to  peace,  a  cession  of  this  territory,  ren- 
dered of  so  much  value  to  the  United  States  by  its  particular  situation,  would 
deprive  them  of  one  of  the  material  funds  on  which  they  rely  for  pursuing  the 
war  against  her.  On  the  part  of  Spain,  this  territorial  fund  is  not  needed  for, 
and,  perhaps,  could  not  be  applied  to,  the  purposes  of  the  war,  and  from  its 
situation  is  otherwise  of  much  less  value  to  her  than  to  the  Uuited  States. 

Congress  have  the  greater  hopes  that  the  pretensions  of  his  Catholic  Majesty 
on  this  subject  will  not  be  so  far  urged  as  to  prove  an  insuperable  obstacle  to 
an  alliance  with  the  United  States,  because  they  conceive  such  pretensions  to 
be  incompatible  with  the  treaties  subsisting  between  France  and  them,  which 
are  to  be  the  basis  and  substance  of  it.  By  article  eleventh  of  the  treaty  of 
alliance,  eventual  and  defensive,  the  possessions  of  the  United  States  are  guar- 
antied to  them  by  his  most  Christian  Majesty.  By  article  twelfth  of  the  same 
treaty,  intended  to  fix  more  precisely  the  sense  and  application  of  the  prece- 
ding article,  it  is  declared,  that  this  guaranty  shall  have  its  full  force  and  effect 
the  moment  a  rupture  shall  take  place  between  France  and  England.  All  the 
possessions,  therefore,  belonging  to  the  United  States  at  the  time  of  that  rup- 
ture, which  being  prior  to  the  rupture  between  Spain  and  England,  must  be 
prior  to  all  claims  of  conquest  by  the  former,  are  guarantied  to  them  by  his 
most  Christian  Majesty. 

Now,  that  in  the  possessions  thus  guarantied  was  meant,  by  the  contracting 
parties,  to  be  included  all  the  territory  within  the  limits  assigned  to  the  Uni- 
ted States  bv  the  treaty  of  Paris,  may  be  inferred  from  the  fifth  article  of  the 
treaty  above  mentioned,  which  declares,  that  if  the  United  States  should  think 
fit  to  attempt  the  reduction  of  the  British  power  remaining  in  the  northern 
parts  of  America,  or  the  Islands  of  Bermudas,  &c,  those  countries  shall,  in 
case  of  success,  be  confederated  with,  or  dependent  upon,  the  United  States. 
For,  if  it  had  been  understood  by  the  parties  that  the  western  territory  in  ques- 
tion, known  to  be  of  so  great  importance  to  the  United  States,  and  a  reduction 


1780.  INSTRUCTIONS,    ETC.  445 

of  it  so  likely  to  be  attempted  by  them,  was  not  included  in  the  general  guar- 
anty, can  it  be  supposed  that  no  notice  would  have  been  taken  of  it,  when  the 
parties  extended  their  views,  not  only  to  Canada,  but  to  the  remote  and  unim- 
portant Island  of  Bermudas?  It  is  true,  that  these  acts  between  France  and 
the  United  States  are  in  no  respects  obligatory  on  his  Catholic  Majesty,  unless 
he  shall  think  fit  to  accede  to  them.  Yet,  as  they  show  the  sense  of  his  most 
Christian  Majesty  on  this  subject,  with  whom  his  Catholic  Majesty  is  intimately 
allied ;  as  it  is  in  pursuance  of  an  express  reservation  to  his  Catholic  Majesty 
in  a  secret  act  subjoined  to  the  treaties  aforesaid  of  a  power  to  accede  to  those 
treaties,  that  the  present  overtures  are  made  on  the  part  of  the  United  States ; 
and  as  it  is  particularly  stated  in  that  act,  that  any  conditions  which  his  Cath- 
olic Majesty  shall  think  fit  to  add  are  to  be  analogous  to  the  principal  aim  of 
the  alliance,  and  conformable  to  the  rules  of  equality,  reciprocity,  and  friend- 
ship, Congress  entertain  too  high  an  opinion  of  the  equity,  moderation,  and 
wisdom  of  his  Catholic  Majesty  not  to  suppose,  that  when  joined  to  these  con- 
siderations, they  will  prevad  against  any  mistaken  views  of  interest  that  may 
be  suggested  to  him. 

The  next  object  of  the  instructions  is  the  free  navigation  of  the  Mississippi 
for  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  in  common  with  the  subjects  of  his  Cath- 
olic Majesty. 

On  this  subject,  the  same  inference  may  be  made  from  article  seventh  of 
the  treaty  of  Paris,  which  stipulates  this  right  in  the  amplest  manner  to  the 
King  of  Great  Britain  ;  and  the  devolution  of  it  to  the  United  States,  as  was 
applied  to  the  territorial  claims  of  the  latter.  Nor  can  Congress  hesitate  to 
believe,  even  if  no  such  right  could  be  inferred  from  that  treaty,  that  the 
generosity  of  his  Catholic  Majesty  would  not  suffer  the  inhabitants  of  these 
States  to  be  put  into  a  worse  condition,  in  this  respect,  by  the  alliance  with 
him  in  the  character  of  a  sovereign  people,  than  they  were  in  when  subjects 
of  a  power  who  was  always  ready  to  turn  their  force  against  his  Majesty ; 
especially  as  one  of  the  great  objects  of  the  proposed  alliance  is  to  give  greater 
effect  to  the  common  exertions  for  disarming  that  power  of  the  faculty  of  dis- 
turbing others.  Besides,  as  the  United  States  have  an  indisputable  right  to 
the  possession  of  the  east  bank  of  the  Mississippi  for  a  very  great  distance,  and 
the  navigation  of  that  river  will  essentially  tend  to  the  prosperity  and  advan- 
tage of  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  that  may  reside  on  the  Mississippi  or 
the  waters  running  into  it,  it  is  conceived  that  the  circumstances  of  Spain's 
beinc  in  possession  of  the  banks  on  both  sides  near  its  mouth,  cannot  be 
deemed  a  natural  or  equitable  bar  to  the  free  use  of  the  river.  Such  a  prin- 
ciple would  authorize  a  nation  disposed  to  take  advantage  of  circumstances  to 
contravene  the  clear  indications  of  nature  and  Providence,  and  the  general 
good  of  mankind. 

The  usage  of  nations  accordingly  seems,  in  such  cases,  to  have  given  to 
those  holding  the  mouth  or  lower  parts  of  a  river  no  right  against  those  above 


44G  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1780. 

them,  except  the  right  of  imposing  a  moderate  toll,  and  that  on  the  equitable 
supposition,  that  such  toll  is  due  for  the  expense  and  trouble  the  former  may 
have  been  put  to.  "An  innocent  passage  (Bays  Vattel)  is  due  to  all  nations 
■with  whom  a  State  is  at  peace  ;  and  this  duty  comprehends  troops  equally  with 
individuals."  If  a  right  to  a  passage  by  land  through  other  countries  may  be 
claimed  for  troops,  which  are  employed  in  the  destruction  of  mankind,  how 
much  more  may  a  passage  by  water  be  claimed  for  commerce,  which  is  bene- 
ficial to  all  nations? 

Here,  again,  it  ought  not  to  be  concealed  that  the  inconveniences  which 
must  be  felt  by  the  inhabitants  on  the  waters  running  westwardly,  under  an 
exclusion  from  the  free  use  of  the  Mississippi,  would  be  a  constant  and  in- 
creasing source  of  disquietude  on  their  part,  of  more  vigorous  precautions  on 
the  part  of  Spain,  and  of  an  irritation  on  both  parts,  which  it  is  equally  the 
interest  and  duty  of  both  to  guard  against. 

But  notwithstanding  the  equitable  claim  of  the  United  States  to  the  free 
navigation  of  the  Mississippi,  and  its  great  importance  to  them,  Congress  have 
so  strong  a  disposition  to  conform  to  the  desires  of  his  Catholic  Majesty,  that 
they  have  agreed  that  such  equitable  regulations  may  be  entered  into  as  may 
be  a  requisite  security  against  contraband  ;  provided,  the  point  of  right  be  not 
relinquished,  and  a  free  port  or  ports  below  the  thirty  first  degree  of  north  lat- 
itude, and  accessible  to  merchant  ships,  be  stipulated  to  them. 

The  reason  why  a  port  or  ports,  as  thus  described,  was  required,  must  be 
obvious.  Without  such  a  stipulation  the  free  use  of  the  Mississippi  would,  in 
fact,  amount  to  no  more  than  a  free  intercourse  with  New  Orleans  and  other 
ports  of  Louisiana.  From  the  rapid  current  of  this  river,  it  is  well  known  that 
it  must  be  navigated  by  vessels  of  a  peculiar  construction,  and  which  will  be 
unfit  to  go  to  sea.  Unless,  therefore,  some  place  be  assigned  to  the  United 
States  where  the  produce  carried  down  the  river,  and  the  merchandise  arriving 
from  abroad,  may  be  deposited  till  they  can  be  respectively  taken  away  by  the 
proper  vessels,  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  a  foreign  trade. 

There  is  a  remaining  consideration  respecting  the  navigation  of  the  Missis- 
sippi which  deeply  concerns  the  maritime  Powers  in  general,  but  more  partic- 
ularly their  most  Christian  and  Catholic  Majesties.  The  country  watered  bv 
the  Ohio,  with  its  large  branches,  having  their  sources  near  the  lakes  on  one 
side,  and  those  running  northwestward  and  falling  into  it  on  the  other  side, 
will  appear  from  a  single  glance  on  a  map  to  be  of  vast  extent.  The  circum- 
stance of  its  being  so  finely  watered,  added  to  the  singular  fertility  of  its  soil, 
and  other  advantages  presented  by  a  new  country,  will  occasion  a  rapidity  of 
population  not  easy  to  be  conceived.  The  spirit  of  emigration  has  already 
shown  itself  in  a  very  strong  degree,  notwithstanding  the  many  impediments 
which  discourage  it.  The  principal  of  these  impediments  is  the  war  with  Brit- 
ain, which  cannot  spare  a  force  sufficient  to  protect  the  emigrants  against  the 
incursions  of  the  savages.     In  a  very  few  years  after  peace  shall  take  place, 


1TS0.  INSTRUCTIONS,    ETC.  447 

this  country  will  certainly  be  overspread  with  inhabitants.  In  like  manner  as 
in  all  new  settlements,  agriculture,  not  manufactures,  will  be  their  employ- 
ment. They  will  raise  wheat,  corn,  beef,  pork,  tobacco,  hemp,  flax,  and  in  the 
Southern  parts,  perhaps,  rice  and  indigo,  in  great  quantities.  On  the  other 
hand,  their  consumption  of  foreign  manufactures  will  be  in  proportion,  if  they 
can  be  exchanged  for  the  produce  of  their  soil.  There  are  but  two  channels 
through  which  such  commerce  can  be  carried  on  ;  the  first  is  down  the  river 
Mississippi ;  the  other  is  up  the  rivers  having  their  sources  near  the  lakes, 
thence  by  short  portages  to  the  lakes,  or  the  rivers  falling  into  them,  and  thence 
through  the  lakes  and  down  the  St.  Lawrence.  The  first  of  these  channels  is 
manifestly  the  most  natural,  and  by  far  the  most  advantageous.  Should  it, 
however,  be  obstructed,  the  second  will  be  found  far  from  impracticable.  If 
no  obstructions  should  be  thrown  in  its  course  down  the  Mississippi,  the  ex- 
ports from  this  immense  tract  of  country  will  not  only  supply  an  abundance 
of  all  necessaries  for  the  West  India  Islands,  but  serve  for  a  valuable  basis  of 
general  trade,  of  which  the  rising  spirit  of  commerce  in  France  and  Spain  will 
no  doubt  particularly  avail  itself.  The  imports  will  be  proportionally  extensive ; 
and  from  the  climate,  as  well  as  from  other  causes,  will  consist  of  the  manu- 
factures of  the  same  countries.  On  the  other  hand,  should  obstructions  in  the 
Mississippi  force  this  trade  into  a  contrary  direction  through  Canada,  France, 
and  Spain,  the  other  maritime  Powers  will  not  only  lose  the  immediate 
benefit  of  it  themselves,  but  they  will  also  suffer  by  the  advantage  it  will  give 
to  Great  Britain.  So  fair  a  prospect  could  not  escape  the  commercial  sagacity 
of  this  nation.  She  would  embrace  it  with  avidity.  She  would  cherish  it  with 
the  most  studious  care.  And  should  she  succeed  in  fixing  it  in  that  channel, 
the  loss  of  her  exclusive  possession  of  the  trade  of  the  United  States  might 
prove  a  much  less  decisive  blow  to  her  maritime  pre-eminence  and  tyranny 
than  has  been  calculated. 

The  last  clause  of  the  instructions  respecting  the  navigation  of  the  waters 
running  out  of  Georgia  through  West  Florida,  not  being  included  in  the  ulti- 
matum, nor  claimed  on  a  footing  of  right,  requires  nothing  to  be  added  to  what 
it  speaks  itself. 

The  utility  of  the  privileges  asked  to  the  State  of  Georgia,  and,  consequently, 
to  the  Union,  is  apparent  from  the  geographical  representation  of  the  country. 
The  motives  for  Spain  to  grant  it  must  be  found  in  her  equity,  generosity,  and 
disposition  to  cultivate  our  friendship  and  intercourse. 

These  observations,  you  will  readily  discern,  are  not  communicated  in  order 
to  be  urged  at  all  events,  and  as  they  here  stand  in  support  of  the  claims  to 
which  they  relate.  They  are  intended  for  your  private  information  and  use, 
and  are  to  be  urged  so  far  and  in  such  forms  only  as  will  best  suit  the  temper 
and  sentiments  of  the  Court  at  which  you  reside,  and  best  fulfil  the  objects  of 
them. 


448  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1783. 


Address  of  Congress  to  the  States. 

On  the  18th  of  April,  1783,  Congress  passed  resolutions  recommending,  as  ne- 
cessary for  restoring  the  public  credit,  and  for  paying  the  principal  and  interest 
of  the  public  debt,  that  Congress  should  be  invested  with  the  power  to  lay  cer- 
tain specific  duties;  that  the  States  themselves  should  levy  a  revenue  to  furnish 
their  respective  quotas  of  a  yearly  aggregate  of  one  million  five  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars  for  paying  the  interest  of  the  public  debt;  and  that  they  should 
make  liberal  cessions  to  the  Union  of  their  territorial  claims.  A  committee,  con- 
sisting of  Mr.  Madison,  Mr.  Ellsworth,  and  Mr.  Hamilton,  was  appointed  to  pre- 
pare an  address  to  the  States,  to  accompany  the  resolutions.  On  the  26th  of 
April,  the  committee  reported  a  draft  (written  by  Mr.  Madison)  of  the  address, 
which  was  agreed  to,  as  follows: 

Address  to  the  States,  by  the  United  States  in  Congress  assembled. 

The  prospect  which  has  for  some  time  existed,  and  which  is  now  happily 
realized,  of  a  successful  termination  of  the  war,  together  with  the  critical  ex- 
igencies of  public  affairs,  have  made  it  the  duty  of  Congress  to  review  and 
provide  for  the  debts  which  the  war  has  left  upon  the  United  States,  and  to 
look  forward  to  the  means  of  obviating  dangers  which  may  interrupt  the  har- 
mony and  tranquillity  of  the  Confederacy.  The  result  of  their  mature  and 
solemn  deliberations  on  these  great  objects  is  contained  in  their  several  rec- 
ommendations of  the  18th  instant  herewith  transmitted.  Although  these  rec- 
ommendations speak  themselves  the  principles  on  which  they  are  founded,  as 
well  as  the  ends  which  they  propose,  it  will  not  be  improper  to  enter  into  a 
few  explanations  and  remarks,  in  order  to  place  in  a  stronger  view  the  neces- 
sity of  complying  with  them. 

The  first  measure  recommended  is,  effectual  provision  for  the  debts  of  the 
United  States.  The  amount  of  these  debts,  as  far  as  they  can  now  be  ascer- 
tained, is  42,000,375  dollars,  as  will  appear  by  the  schedule  No.  1.  To  dis- 
charge the  principal  of  this  aggregate  debt  at  once,  or  in  any  short  period,  is 
evidently  not  within  the  compass  of  our  resources ;  and  even  if  it  could  be  ac- 
complished, the  ease  of  the  community  would  require  that  the  debt  itself 
should  be  left  to  a  course  of  gradual  extinguishment,  and  certain  funds  be 
provided  for  paying,  in  the  mean  time,  the  annual  interest.  The  amount  of 
the  annual  interest,  as  will  appear  by  the  paper  last  referred  to,  is  computed 
to  be  2,415,956  dollars.  Funds,  therefore,  which  will  certainly  and  punctually 
produce  this  annual  sum,  at  least,  must  be  provided. 

In  devising  these  funds,  Congress  did  not  overlook  the  mode  of  supplying 
the  common  treasury,  provided  by  the  Articles  of  Confederation  ;  but  after  the 
most  respectful  consideration  of  that  mode,  they  were  constrained  to  regard  it 
as  inadequate  and  inapplicable  to  the  form  into  which  the  public  debt  must  be 
thrown.     The  delavs  and  uncertainties  incident  to  a  revenue  to  be  established 


1783.  ADDRESS     TO    THE    STATES.  449 

and  collected,  from  time  to  time,  by  thirteen  independent  authorities,  is,  at 
first  view,  irreconcilable  with  the  punctuality  essential  in  the  discharge  of  the 
interest  of  a  national  debt.  Our  own  experience,  after  making  every  allow- 
ance for  transient  impediments,  has  been  a  sufficient  illustration  of  this  truth. 
Some  departure,  therefore,  in  the  recommendations  of  Congress,  from  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution,  was  unavoidable;  but  it  will  be  found  to  be  as  small  as  could 
be  reconciled  with  the  object  in  view,  and  to  be  supported  besides  by  solid 
considerations  of  interest  and  sound  policy. 

The  fund  which  first  presented  itself  on  this,  as  it  did  on  a  former  occasion, 
was  a  tax  on  imports.  The  reasons  which  recommended  this  branch  of  reve- 
nue have  heretofore  been  stated  in  an  act,  of  which  a  copy,  No.  2,  is  now  for- 
warded, and  need  not  be  here  repeated.  It  will  suffice  to  recapitulate,  that 
taxes  on  consumption  are  always  least  burthensome,  because  they  are  least 
felt,  and  are  borne,  too,  by  those  who  are  both  willing  and  able  to  pay  them  ; 
that,  of  all  taxes  on  consumption,  those  on  foreign  commerce  are  most  com- 
patible with  the  genius  and  policy  of  free  States  ;  that  from  the  relative  posi- 
tions of  some  of  the  more  commercial  States,  it  will  be  impossible  to  bring 
this  essential  resource  into  use  without  a  concerted  uniformity ;  that  this  uni- 
formity cannot  be  concerted  through  any  channel  so  properly  as  through  Con- 
gress, nor  for  any  purpose  so  aptly  as  for  paying  the  debts  of  a  revolution, 
from  which  an  unbounded  freedom  has  accrued  to  commerce. 

In  renewing  this  proposition  to  the  States,  we  have  not  been  unmindful  of 
the  objections  which  heretofore  frustrated  the  unanimous  adoption  of  it.  We 
have  limited  the  duration  of  the  revenue  to  the  term  of  25  years;  and  we  have 
left  to  the  States  themselves  the  appointment  of  the  officers  who  are  to  collect 
it.  If  the  strict  maxims  of  national  credit  alone  were  to  be  consulted,  the 
revenue  ought  manifestly  to  be  co-existent  with  the  object  of  it,  and  the  col- 
lection placed  in  every  respect  under  that  authority  which  is  to  dispense  the 
former,  and  is  responsible  for  the  latter.  These  relaxations  will,  we  trust,  be 
regarded,  on  one  hand,  as  the  effect  of  a  disposition  in  Congress  to  attend  at 
all  times  to  the  sentiments  of  those  whom  they  serve,  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
as  a  proof  of  their  anxious  desire  that  provision  may  be  made  in  some  way  or 
other  for  an  honorable  and  just  fulfilment  of  the  engagements  which  they  have 
formed. 

To  render  this  fund  as  productive  as  possible,  and  at  the  same  time  to  nar. 
row  the  room  for  collusions  and  frauds,  it  has  been  judged  an  improvement 
of  the  plan  to  recommend  a  liberal  duty  on  such  articles  as  are  most  suscept- 
ible of  a  tax  according  to  their  quantity,  and  are  of  most  equal  and  general 
consumption ;  leaving  all  other  articles,  as  heretofore  proposed,  to  be  taxed 
according  to  their  value. 

The  amount  of  this  fund  is  computed  to  be  915,95G  dollars.  The  estimates 
on  which  the  computation  is  made  are  detailed  in  paper  No.  3.  Accuracy 
in  the  first  essay  on  so  complex  and  fluctuating  a  subject  is  not  to  be  expected. 

vol.  iv.  29 


450  WOKKS    OF    MADISON.  1783. 

It  is  presumed  to  be  as  near  the  truth  as  the  defect  of  proper  materials  would 
admit. 

The  residue  of  the  computed  interest  is  1,500,000  dollars,  and  is  referred  to 
the  States  to  be  provided  for  by  such  funds  as  they  may  judge  most  convenient. 
Here  again  the  strict  maxims  of  public  credit  gave  way  to  the  desire  of  Con- 
gress to  conform  to  the  sentiments  of  their  constituents.  It  ought  not  to  be 
omitted,  however,  with  respect  to  this  portion  of  the  revenue,  that  the  mode 
in  which  it  is  to  be  supplied  varies  so  little  from  that  pointed  out  in  the  Arti- 
cles of  Confederation,  and  the  variations  are  so  conducive  to  the  great  object 
proposed,  that  a  ready  and  unqualified  compliance  on  the  part  of  the  States 
may  be  more  justly  expected.  In  fixing  the  quotas  of  this  sum,  Congress,  as 
may  be  well  imagined,  were  guided  by  very  imperfect  lights,  and  some  in- 
equalities may  consequently  have  ensued.  These,  however,  can  be  but  tem- 
porary, and,  as  far  as  they  may  exist  at  all,  will  be  redressed  by  a  retrospective 
adjustment,  as  soon  as  a  constitutional  rule  can  be  applied. 

The  necessity  of  making  the  two  foregoing  provisions  one  indivisible  and 
irrevocable  act,  is  apparent.  Without  the  first  quality,  partial  provision  only 
might  be  made  where  complete  provision  is  essential ;  nay,  as  some  States 
might  prefer  and  adopt  one  of  the  funds  only,  and  the  other  States  the  other 
fund  only,  it  might  happen  that  no  provision  at  all  would  be  made;  without 
the  second,  a  single  State  out  of  the  thirteen  might  at  any  time  involve  the 
nation  in  bankruptcy,  the  mere  practicability  of  which  would  be  a  fatal  bar  to 
the  establishment  of  national  credit.  Instead  of  enlarging  on  these  topics,  two 
observations  are  submitted  to  the  justice  and  wisdom  of  the  Legislatures. 
First:  The  present  creditors,  or  rather  the  domestic  part  of  them,  having  either 
made  their  loans  for  a  period  which  has  expired,  or  having  become  creditors 
in  the  first  instance  involuntarily,  are  entitled,  on  the  clear  principles  of  justice 
and  good  faith,  to  demand  the  principal  of  their  credits,  instead  of  accepting 
the  annual  interest.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  as  the  principal  cannot  be  paid 
to  them  on  demand,  that  the  interest  should  be  so  effectually  and  satisfactorily 
secured  as  to  enable  them,  if  they  incline,  to  transfer  their  stock  at  its  full 
value.  Secondly,  if  the  funds  be  so  firmly  constituted  as  to  inspire  a  thorough 
and  universal  confidence,  may  it  not  be  hoped  that  the  capital  of  the  domestic 
debt,  which  bears  the  high  interest  of  six  per  cent.,  may  be  cancelled  by  other 
loans  obtained  at  a  more  moderate  interest?  The  saving  by  such  an  opera- 
tion would  be  a  clear  one,  and  might  be  a  considerable  one.  As  a  proof  of 
the  necessity  of  substantial  funds  for  the  support  of  our  credit  abroad,  we  refer 
to  paper  No.  4. 

Thus  much  for  the  interest  of  the  national  debt ;  for  the  discharge  of  the 
principal  within  the  term  limited,  we  rely  on  the  natural  increase  of  the  reve- 
nue from  commerce,  on  requisitions  to  be  made,  from  time  to  time,  for  that 
purpose,  as  circumstances  may  dictate,  and  on  the  prospect  of  vacant  territory. 
If  these  resources  should  prove  inadequate,  it  will  be  necessary,  at  the  expira- 


1783.  ADDRESS    TO    THE    STATES.  451 

tion  of  25  years,  to  continue  the  funds  now  recommended,  or  to  establish  such 
others  as  may  then  be  found  more  convenient. 

With  a  view  to  the  resource  last  mentioned,  as  well  as  to  obviate  disagree- 
able controversies  and  confusions,  Congress  have  included  in  their  present 
recommendations  a  renewal  of  those  of  the  6th  day  of  September,  and  of  the 
10th  day  of  October,  1780.  In  both  those  respects,  a  liberal  and  final  accom- 
modation of  all  interfering  claims  of  vacant  territory  is  an  object  which  can- 
not be  pressed  with  too  much  solicitude. 

The  last  object  recommended  is,  a  constitutional  change  of  the  rule  by 
which  a  partition  of  the  common  burthens  is  to  be  made.  The  expediency, 
and  even  necessity  of  such  a  change,  has  been  sufficiently  enforced  by  the 
local  injustice  and  discontents  which  have  proceeded  from  valuations  of  the 
soil  in  every  State  where  the  experiment  has  been  made.  But  how  infinitely 
must  these  evils  be  increased,  on  a  comparison  of  such  valuation  among  the 
States  themselves!  On  whatever  side  indeed  this  rule  be  surveyed,  the  exe- 
cution of  it  must  be  attended  with  the  most  serious  difficulties.  If  the  valua- 
tions be  referred  to  the  authorities  of  the  several  States,  a  general  satisfaction 
is  not  to  be  hoped  for ;  if  they  be  executed  by  officers  of  the  United  States 
traversing  the  country  for  that  purpose,  besides  the  inequalities  against  which 
this  mode  would  be  no  security,  the  expense  would  be  both  enormous  and  ob- 
noxious; if  the  mode  taken  in  the  act  of  the  17th  day  of  February  last,  which 
was  deemed  on  the  whole  least  objectionable,  be  adhered  to,  still  the  insuffi- 
ciency of  the  data  to  the  purpose  to  which  they  are  to  be  applied  must  greatly 
impair,  if  not  utterly  destroy,  all  confidence  in  the  accuracy  of  the  result;  not 
to  mention  that,  as  far  as  the  result  can  be  at  all  a  just  one,  it  will  be  indebted 
for  the  advantage  to  the  principle  on  which  the  rule  proposed  to  be  substituted 
is  founded.  This  rule,  although  not  free  from  objections,  is  liable  to  fewer 
than  any  other  that  could  be  devised.  The  only  material  difficulty  which  at- 
tended it  in  the  deliberations  of  Congress,  was  to  fix  the  proper  difference  be- 
tween the  labour  and  industry  of  free  inhabitants  and  of  all  other  inhabitants. 
The  ratio  ultimately  agreed  on  was  the  effect  of  mutual  concessions;  and  if  it 
should  be  supposed  not  to  correspond  precisely  with  the  fact,  no  doubt  ought 
to  be  entertained  that  an  equal  spirit  of  accommodation  among  the  several  Le- 
gislatures will  prevail  against  little  inequalities  which  may  be  calculated  on  one 
side  or  on  the  other.  But  notwithstanding  the  confidence  of  Congress  as  to 
the  success  of  this  proposition,  it  is  their  duty  to  recollect  that  the  event  may 
possibly  disappoint  them,  and  to  request  that  measures  may  still  be  pursued 
for  obtaining  and  transmitting  the  information  called  for  in  the  act  of  the  17th 
of  February  last,  which  in  such  event  will  be  essential. 

The  plan  thus  communicated  and  explained  by  Congress  must  now  receive 
its  fate  from  their  constituents.  All  the  objects  comprised  in  it  are  conceived 
to  be  of  great  importance  to  the  happiness  of  this  confederated  Republic — are 
necessary  to  render  the  fruits  of  the  Revolution  a  full  reward  for  the  blood,  the' 


452  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1783. 

toils,  the  caies,  and  the  calamities  which  have  purchased  it.  But  the  ob- 
ject of  which  the  necessity  will  be  peculiarly  felt,  and  which  it  is  peculiarly 
the  duty  of  Congress  to  inculcate,  is  the  provision  recommended  for  the  na- 
tional debt.  Although  this  debt  is  greater  than  could  have  been  wished,  it  is 
still  less,  on  the  whole,  than  could  have  been  expected;  and  when  referred  to 
the  cause  in  which  it  has  been  incurred,  and  compared  with  the  burdens  which 
wars  of  ambition  and  of  vain  glory  have  entailed  on  other  nations,  ought  to  be 
borne  not  only  with  cheerfulness  but  with  pride.  But  the  magnitude  of  the 
debt  makes  no  part  of  the  question.  It  is  sufficient  that  the  debt  has  been 
fairly  contracted,  and  that  justice  and  good  faith  demand  that  it  should  be  fully 
discharged.  Congress  had  no  option  but  between  different  modes  of  discharg- 
ing it.  The  same  option  is  the  only  one  that  can  exist  with  the  States.  The 
mode  which  has,  after  long  and  elaborate  discussion,  been  preferred,  is,  we  are 
persuaded,  the  least  objectionable  of  any  that  would  have  been  equal  to  the 
purpose.  Under  this  persuasion,  we  call  upon  the  justice  and  plighted  faith 
of  the  several  States  to  give  it  its  proper  effect,  to  reflect  on  the  consequences 
of  rejecting  it,  and  to  remember  that  Congress  will  not  be  answerable  for 
them. 

If  other  motives  than  that  of  justice  could  be  requisite  on  this  occasion,  no 
nation  could  ever  feel  stronger ;  for  to  whom  are  the  debts  to  be  paid  ? 

To  an  ally,  in  the  first  place,  who  to  the  exertion  of  his  arms  in  support 
of  our  cause  has  added  the  succours  of  his  treasure;  who  to  his  important 
loans  has  added  liberal  donations,  and  whose  loans  themselves  carry  the  im- 
pression of  his  magnanimity  and  friendship.  For  more  exact  information  on 
this  point  we  refer  to  paper  No.  5. 

To  individuals  in  a  foreign  country,  in  the  next  place,  who  were  the  first 
to  give  so  precious  a  token  of  their  confidence  in  our  justice,  and  of  their 
friendship  for  our  cause,  and  who  are  members  of  a  republic  which  was  second 
in  espousing  our  rank  among  nations.  For  the  claims  and  expectations  of  this 
class  of  creditors  we  refer  to  paper  No.  G. 

Another  class  of  creditors  is  that  illustrious  and  patriotic  band  of  fellow, 
citizens,  whose  blood  and  whose  bravery  have  defended  the  liberties  of  their 
country;  who  have  patiently  borne,  among  other  distresses,  the  privation  of 
their  stipends,  whilst  the  distresses  of  their  country  disabled  it  from  bestowing 
them ;  and  who,  even  now,  ask  for  no  more  than  such  a  portion  of  their  dues 
as  will  enable  them  to  retire  from  the  field  of  victory  and  glory  into  the  bosom 
of  peace  and  private  citizenship,  and  for  such  effectual  security  for  the  residue 
of  their  claims  as  their  country  is  now  unquestionably  able  to  provide.  For  a 
full  view  of  their  sentiments  and  wishes  on  this  subject,  we  transmit  the  paper 
No.  7;  and  as  a  fresh  and  lively  instance  of  their  superiority  to  every  species 
of  seduction  from  the  paths  of  virtue  and  honor,  we  add  the  paper  No.  8. 

The  remaining  class  of  creditors  is  composed  partly  of  such  of  our  fellow- 
citizens  as  originally  lent  to  the  public  the  use  of  their  funds,  or  have  since 


1783.  ADDRESS    TO    THE    STATES.  453 

manifested  most  confidence  in  their  country,  by  receiving  transfers  from  the  lend- 
ers ;  and  partly  of  those  whose  property  has  been  either  advanced  or  assumed 
for  the  public  service.  To  discriminate  the  merits  of  these  several  descriptions 
of  creditors,  would  be  a  task  equally  unnecessary  and  invidious.  If  the  voice 
of  humanity  plead  more  loudly  in  favour  of  some  than  of  others,  the  voice  of 
policy,  no  less  than  of  justice,  pleads  in  favour  of  all.  A  wise  nation  will 
never  permit  those  who  relieve  the  wants  of  their  country,  or  who  rely  most  ou 
its  faith,  its  firmness,  and  its  resources,  when  either  of  them  is  distrusted,  to 
suffer  by  the  event. 

Let  it  be  remembered,  finally,  that  it  has  ever  been  the  pride  and  boast  of 
America,  that  the  rights  for  which  she  contended  were  the  rights  of  human 
nature.  By  the  blessing  of  the  Author  of  these  rights  on  the  means  exerted 
for  their  defence,  they  have  prevailed  against  all  opposition,  and  form  the  basis 
of  thirteen  independent  States.  No  instance  has  heretofore  occurred,  nor  can 
any  instance  be  expected  hereafter  to  occur,  in  which  the  unadulterated  forms 
of  republican  Government  can  pretend  to  so  fair  an  opportunity  of  justifying 
themselves  by  their  fruits.  In  this  view  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  are 
responsible  for  the  greatest  trust  ever  confided  to  a  political  society.  If  justice; 
good  faith,  honor,  gratitude,  and  all  the  other  qualities  which  ennoble  the 
character  of  a  nation,  and  fulfil  the  ends  of  government,  be  the  fruits  of  our 
establishments,  the  cause  of  liberty  will  acquire  a  dignity  and  lustre  which  it 
has  never  yet  enjoyed;  and  an  example  will  be  set  which  cannot  but  have  the 
most  favourable  influence  on  the  rights  of  mankind.  If,  on  the  other  side,  our 
governments  should  be  unfortunately  blotted  with  the  reverse  of  these  cardi- 
nal and  essential  virtues,  the  great  cause  which  we  have  engaged  to  vindicate 
will  be  dishonored  and  betrayed ;  the  last  and  fairest  experiment  in  favour  of 
the  rights  of  human  nature  will  be  turned  against  them ;  and  their  patrons  and 
friends  exposed  to  be  insulted  and  silenced  by  the  votaries  of  tyranny  and 
usurpation. 

By  order  of  the  United.  States  in  Congress  assembled. 


454  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1791. 


ESSAYS,    ETC. 


1.  Population  and  Emigration. 

Both  in  the  vegetable  and  animal  kingdoms  every  species  derives  from  na- 
ture a  reproductive  faculty  beyond  the  demand  for  merely  keeping  up  its  stock ; 
the  seed  of  a  single  plant  is  sufficient  to  multiply  it  one  hundred  or  a  thousand 
fold.     The  animal  offspring  is  never  limited  to  the  number  of  its  parents.* 

This  ordinance  of  Nature  is  calculated,  in  both  instances,  for  a  double 
purpose.  In  both  it  insures  the  life  of  the  species,  which,  if  the  generative  prin- 
ciple had  not  a  multiplying  energy,  would  be  reduced  in  number  by  every  pre- 
mature destruction  of  individuals,  and  by  degrees  would  be  extinguished 
altogether.  In  vegetable  species  the  surplus  answers,  moreover,  the  essential 
purpose  of  sustaining  the  herbivorous  tribes  of  animals,  as  in  the  animal  the  sur- 
plus serves  the  like  purpose  of  sustenance  to  the  carnivorous  tribes.  A  crop 
of  wheat  may  be  reproduced  by  one-tenth  of  itself.  The  remaining  nine-tenths 
can  be  spared  for  the  animals  which  feed  on  it.  A  flock  of  sheep  may  be  con- 
tinued by  a  certain  proportion  of  its  annual  increase.  The  residue  is  the 
bounty  of  Nature  to  the  animals  which  prey  on  that  species. 

Man,  who  preys  both  on  the  vegetable  and  animal  species,  is  himself  a  prey 
to  neither.  He  too  possesses  the  reproductive  principle  far  beyond  the  degree 
requisite  for  the  bare  continuance  of  his  species.  What  becomes  of  the  surplus 
of  human  life  to  which  this  principle  is  competent? 

It  is  either,  1st,  destroyed  by  infanticide,  as  among  the  Chinese  and  Lacede- 
monians ;  or,  2d,  it  is  stifled  or  starved,  as  amoug  other  nations  whose  population 
is  [not?]  commensurate  to  its  food  ;  or,  3d,  it  is  consumed  by  wars  and  endemic 
diseases;  or,  4th,  it  overflows,  by  emigration,  to  places  where  a  surplus  of  food 
is  attainable.  What  may  be  the  greatest  ratio  of  increase  of  which  the  human 
species  is  susceptible,  is  a  problem  difficult  to  be  solved,  as  well  because  pre- 
cise experiments  have  never  been  made,  as  because  the  result  would  vary  with 
the  circumstances  distinguishing  different  situations.  It  has  been  computed 
that  under  the  most  favorable  circumstances  possible,  a  given  number  would 
double  itself  in  ten  years.     What  has  actually  happened  in  this  country  is  a 

*Tbe  multiplying  power  in  some  instances,  animal  as  well  as  vegetable,  is  astonishing.  An  an- 
nual plant  of  two  seeds  produces  in  20  years  1,04^,576,  and  there  are  are  plants  which  hear  more 
than  40,000  seeds.  The  roe  of  a  codfish  is  said  to  contain  a  million  of  eggs;  mites  will  multiply  to 
a  thousand  in  a  day;  and  there  are  viviparous  flies  which  produce  2,000  at  once.  See  Still  ingfleet 
and  Bradley's  Philosophical  Account  of  Nature. 


1791.  POPULATION    AND    EMIGRATION.  }.-,.', 

proof  that  Nature  would  require  for  the  purpose  a  less  period  than  twentj 
years.     We  shall  be  safe  in  averaging  the  surplus  at  five  per  cent.* 

According  to  this  computation,  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  which  contain 
about  ten  millions  of  people,  are  capable  of  producing  annually  for  emigration 
no  less  than  five  hundred  thousand;  France,  whose  population  amounts  to 
twenty-five  millions,  no  less  than  one  million  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand ; 
and  all  Europe,  stating  its  numbers  at  one  hundred  and  fifty  millions,  no  less 
than  seven  and  a  half  millions. 

It  is  not  meant  that  such  a  surplus  could,  under  any  revolution  of  circum- 
stances, suddenly  take  place;  yet  no  reason  occurs  why  an  annual  supply  of 
human  as  well  as  other  animal  life,  to  any  amount  not  exceeding  the  multiply- 
ing faculty,  would  not  be  produced  in  one  country  by  a  regular  and  commen- 
surate demand  of  another.  Nor  is  it  meant  that  if  such  a  redundancy  of  popu- 
lation were  to  happen  in  any  particular  country,  an  influx  of  it  beyond  a  certain 
degree  ought  to  be  desired  by  any  other,  though  within  that  degree  it  ought  to 
be  invited  by  a  country  greatly  deficient  in  its  population.  The  calculation 
may  serve,  nevertheless,  by  placing  an  important  principle  in  a  striking  view, 
to  prepare  the  way  for  the  following  positions  and  remarks  : 

First.  Every  country  whose  population  is  full  may  annually  spare  a  portion 
of  its  inhabitants,  like  a  hive  of  bees  its  swarm,  without  any  diminution  of  its 
number;  nay,  a  certain  portion  must  necessarily  be  either  spared,  or  destroyed, 
or  kept  out  of  existence/}" 

Secondly.  It  follows,  moreover,  from  this  multiplying  faculty  of  human  na- 
ture, that  in  a  nation  sparing  or  losing  more  than  its  proper  surplus,  the  level 
must  soon  be  restored  by  the  internal  resources  of  life. 

Thirdly.  Emigrations  may  even  augment  the  population  of  the  country 
permitting  them.  The  commercial  nations  of  Europe,  parting  with  emigrants 
to  America,  are  examples.  The  articles  of  consumption  demanded  from  the 
former  have  created  employment  for  an  additional  number  of  manufacturers. 
The  produce  remitted  from  the  latter,  in  the  form  of  raw  materials,  has  had 
the  same  effect ;  whilst  the  imports  and  exports  of  every  kind  have  multiplied 
European  merchants  and  mariners.  Where  the  settlers  have  doubled  every 
twenty  or  twenty-five  years,  as  in  the  United  States,  the  increase  of  products 

*  Emigrants  from  Europe,  enjoying  freedom  in  a  climate  similar  to  their  own,  increase  at  the 
rate  of  Ave  per  cent,  a  year  Among  Africans  suffering,  or  (in  the  language  of  some)  enjoying 
slavery  in  a  climate  similar  to  their  own,  human  life  has  been  consumed  in  an  equal  ratio.  Under 
all  the  mitigations  latterly  applied  in  the  British  West  Indies,  it  is  admitted  that  an  annual  decrease 
of  one  per  cent,  has  taken  place.    What  a  comment  on  the  African  tradel 

f  The  most  remarkable  instances  of  the  swarms  of  people  that  have  been  spared  without  dimin- 
ishing the  parent  stock,  are  the  colonies  and  colonies  of  colonies  among  the  ancient  Greeks.  Mile- 
turn,  which  was  itself  a  colony,  is  reported  by  Pliny  to  have  established  no  less  than  eighty  colo- 
nies, on  the  Hellespont,  the  Propontis,  and  the  Euxine.  Other  facts  of  a  like  kind  are  to  be  found 
in  the  Greek  historians. 


456  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1791. 

and  consumption  in  the  new  country,  and  consequently  of  employment  and 
people  in  the  old,  has  had  a  corresponding  rapidity. 

Of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  nearly  three  millions  are  of  British  de- 
scent.* The  British  population  has,  notwithstanding,  increased  within  the 
period  of  our  establishment.  It  was  the  opinion  of  the  famous  Sir  Josiah 
Child,  that  every  man  in  the  British  colonics  found  employment,  and,  of  course, 
subsistence  for  four  persons  at  home.  According  to  this  estimate,  as  more 
than  half  a  million  of  the  adult  mules  in  the  United  States  equally  contribute 
employment  at  this  time  to  British  subjects,  there  must  at  this  time  be  more 
than  two  millions  of  British  subjects  subsisting  on  the  fruits  of  British  emigra- 
tions. This  result,  however,  seems  to  be  beyoud  the  real  proportion.  Let  us 
attempt  a  less  vague  calculation. 

The  value  of  British  imports  into  the  United  States,  including  British  freight, 
may  be  stated  at  about  fifteen  millions  of  dollars.  Deduct  two  millions  for 
foreign  articles  coming  through  British  hands,  there  remain  thirteen  millions. 
About  half  our  exports,  valued  at  ten  millions  of  dollars,  are  remitted  to  that 
nation.  From  the  nature  of  the  articles,  the  freight  cannot  be  less  than  three 
millions  of  dollars;  of  which  about  one-fifth, f  being  the  share  of  the  United 
States,  there  is  to  be  added  to  the  former  remainder  two  million  four  hundred 
thousand.  The  profit  accruing  from  the  articles  as  materials  or  auxiliaries 
for  manufactures,  is  probably  at  least  fifty  per  cent.,  or  five  millions  of  dollars. J 
The  three  sums  make  twenty  million  four  hundred  thousand  dollars — call 
them,  in  round  numbers,  twenty  millions.  The  expense  of  supporting  a  la- 
bouring family  in  Great  Britain,  as  computed  by  Sir  John  Sinclair,  on  six 
families  containing  thirty-four  persons,  averages  £4  lis.  10ii?.  sterling,  or 
about  twenty  dollars  a  head.  As  his  families  were  of  the  poorer  class,  and  the 
subsistence  a  bare  competency,  let  twenty-five  per  cent,  be  added,  making  the 
expense  about  twenty-five  dollars  a  head.  Dividing  twenty  millions  by  this  sum, 
we  have  eight  hundred  thousand  for  the  number  of  British  persons  whose  sub- 

*  Irish  is  meant  to  be  included. 

f  This  is  stated  as  the  fact  is,  not  as  it  ought  to  he.  The  United  States  are  reasonably  entitled  to 
half  the  freight,  if,  under  regulations  perlectly  reciprocal  iu  every  channel  of  navigation,  they  could 
acquire  that  share.  According  to  Lord  Sheffield,  indeed,  the  United  States  are  well  off  compared 
with  other  nations;  the  tonnage  employed  in  the  trade  with  the  whole  of  them,  previous  to  the 
American  Revolution,  haviug  be'ouged  to  British  subjects  iu  the  proportion  of  more  than  eleven- 
twelfths,  la  the  year  1000,  other  nations  owned  about  1-4;  in  1700,  less  than  1-6;  iu  1725,  1-19; 
in  1750,  1-12;  in  1774,  less  thin  that  proportion.  What  the  proportion  is  now,  is  not  known.  If 
such  has  been  the  operation  of  the  British  navigation  law  on  other  nations,  it  is  our  duty,  without 
inquiring  into  thoir  acquiescence  in  its  monopolizing  tendency,  to  defend  ourselves  against  it  by 
all  the  fair  and  prudent  means  iu  our  power. 

J  This  is  admitted  to  be  a  very  vague  estimate.  The  proportion  of  our  exports,  which  are  ci  her 
necessaries  of  life  or  have  some  profitable  connexion  with  manufactures,  might  be  pretty  easily 
computed.  The  actual  profit  drawn  from  that  proportion  is  a  more  difficult  task;  but  if  tolerably 
ascertained  and  compared  with  the  proportion  of  such  of  our  imports  as  are  not  for  mere  cousump* 
tion,  would  present  one  very  interesting  view  of  the  commerce  of  the  United  States 


1791.  POPULATION    AND    EMIGRATION.  457 

sisteuce  may  be  traced  to  emigration  for  its  source  ;  or,  allowing  eight  shillings 
sterling  a  week  for  the  support  of  a  working  man,  we  have  two  hundred  six- 
teen thousand  three  hundred  forty-five  of  that  class,  for  the  number  derived 
from  the  same  source. 

This  lesson  of  fact,  which  merits  the  notice  of  every  commercial  nation,  may 
be  enforced  by  a  more  general  view  of  the  subject. 

The  present  imports  of  the  United  States,  adding  to  the  first  cost,  &c,  one- 
hall'  the  freight  as  the  reasonable  share  of  foreign  nations,  may  be  stated  at 
twenty-five  millions  of  dollars.  Deducting  five  millions  on  account  of  East 
India  articles,  there  remain  in  favour  of  Europe  twenty  millions  of  dollars. 
The  foreign  labour  incorporated  with  such  part  of  our  exports  as  are  subjects 
or  ingredients  for  manufactures,  together  with  half  the  export  freight,  is  prob- 
ably not  of  less  value  than  fifteen  millions  of  dollars.  The  two  sums  together 
make  thirty-five  millions  of  dollars,  capable  of  supporting  two  hundred  thirty- 
three  thousand  three  hundred  thirty-three  families  of  six  persons  each,  or  three 
hundred  seventy-eight  thousand  six  hundred  aud  five  men,  living  on  eight 
shillings  sterling  a  week. 

The  share  of  this  benefit  which  each  nation  is  to  enjoy  will  be  determined 
by  many  circumstances.  One  that  must  have  a  certain  and  material  influence, 
will  be  the  taste  excited  here  for  their  respective  products  and  fabrics.  This 
influence  has  been  felt  in  all  its  force  by  the  commerce  of  Great  Britain, 
as  the  advantage  originated  in  the  emigrations  from  that  country  to  this. 
Among  the  means  of  retaining  ii  will  not  be  numbered  a  restraint  on  emigra- 
tions. Other  nations,  who  have  to  acquire  their  share  in  our  commerce,  are 
still  more  interested  in  aiding  their  other  efforts  by  permitting  and  even  pro- 
moting emigrations  to  this  country,  as  fast  as  it  may  be  disposed  to  welcome 
them.  The  space  left  by  every  ten  or  twenty  thousand  emigrants  will  be 
speedily  filled  by  a  surplus  of  life  that  would  otherwise  be  lost.  The  twenty 
thousand  in  their  new  country,  calling  for  the  manufactures  and  productions 
required  by  their  habits,  will  employ  and  sustain  ten  thousand  persons  in  their 
former  country,  as  a  clear  addition  to  its  stock.  In  twenty  or  twenty-five  years, 
the  number  so  employed  and  added  will  be  twenty  thousand.  Aud  in  the 
mean  time  example  and  information  will  be  diffusing  the  same  taste  amono- 
other  inhabitants  here,  and  proportionally  extending  employment  and  popu- 
lation there. 

Fourthly.  Freedom  of  emigration  is  due  to  the  general  interests  of  humanity. 
The  course  of  emigrations  being  always  from  places  where  living  is  more  diffi- 
cult to  places  where  it  is  less  difficult,  the  happiness  of  the  emigrant  is  promo- 
ted by  the  change ;  and  as  a  more  numerous  progeny  is  another  effect  of  the 
same  cause,  human  life  is  at  once  made  a  greater  blessing,  and  more  indi- 
viduals are  created  to  partake  of  it. 

The  annual  expense  of  supporting  the  poor  in  England  amounts  to  more 


458  WORKS    OF    MADISON.       <  1791. 

than  one  million  and  a  half  sterling.*  The  number  of  persons  subsisting  them- 
selves not  more  than  six  months  in  the  year  is  computed  at  one  million  two 
hundred  sixty-eight  thousand,  and  the  number  of  beggars  at  forty  eight  thou- 
sand. In  Prance  it  has  been  computed  that  seven  millions  of  men,  women, 
and  children  live,  one  with  another,  on  twenty-five  livres,  which  is  less  than  five 
dollars  a  year.     Every  benevolent  reader  will  make  his  own  reflections. 

Fifthly.  It  may  not  be  superfluous  to  add,  that  freedom  of  emigration  is 
favorable  to  morals.  A  great  proportion  of  the  vices  which  distinguish  crowded 
from  thin  settlements,  are  known  to  have  their  rise  in  the  facility  of  illicit  in- 
tercourse between  the  sexes  on  one  hand,  and  the  difficulty  of  maintaining  a 
family  on  the  other.  Provide  an  outlet  for  the  surplus  of  population,  and  mar- 
riages will  be  increased  in  proportion.  Every  four  or  five  emigrants  will  be 
the  fruit  of  a  legitimate  union  which  would  not  otherwise  have  taken  place. 

Sixthly.  The  remarks  which  have  been  made,  though  in  many  respects 
little  applicable  to  the  internal  situation  of  the  United  States,  may  be  of  use 
as  far  as  they  tend  to  prevent  mistaken  and  narrow  ideas  on  an  important  sub- 
ject. Our  country  being  populated  in  different  degrees  in  different  parts  of  it, 
removals  from  the' more  compact  to  the  more  sparse  or  vacant  districts  are 
continually  going  forward.  The  object  of  these  removals  is  evidently  to  ex- 
change a  less  easy  for  a  more  easy  subsistence.  The  effect  of  them  must 
therefore  be  to  quicken  the  aggregate  population  of  our  country.  Considering 
the  progress  made  in  some  situations  towards  their  natural  complement  of  in- 
habitants, and  the  fertility  of  others  which  have  made  little  or  no  progress,  the 
probable  difference  in  their  respective  rates  of  increase  is  not  less  than  as  three 
in  the  former  to  five  in  the  latter.  Instead  of  lamenting,  then,  a  loss  of  three 
human  beings  to  Connecticut,  Rhode  Island,  or  New  Jersey,  the  Philanthro- 
pist will  rejoice  that  five  will  be  gained  to  New  York,  Vermont,  or  Kentucky, 
and  the  patriot  will  be  uot  less  pleased  that  two  will  be  added  to  the  citizens 
of  the  United  States. 

Philadelphia,  Nov.  19,  1791. 


2.  Consolidation. 

Much  has  been  said,  and  not  without  reason,  against  the  consolidation  of 
the  States  into  one  government.  Omitting  lesser  objections,  two  consequences 
would  probably  flow  from  such  a  change  in  our  political  system,  which  jus- 

*  From  Easter,  1775,  to  Easter,  1776,  was  expended  the  sum  of  £1,656,804  6s.  3<Z.  sterling.    See 
Anderson,  vol.  v,p.  275.    This  well-informed  writer  conjectures  the  annual  expense  to  be  near 
£2,000,000  sterling.    It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  number  and  expense  of  the  poor  in  the  United  ' 
States  cauuot  he  contrasted  with  such  statements.     The  subject  well  merits  research,  and  would 
produce  tho  truest  eulogium  on  our  country. 


1791.  CONSOLIDATION.  459 

tify  the  cautious  used  against  it.  First,  it  would  be  impossible  to  avoid  the 
dilemma  of  either  relinquishing  the  present  energy  and  responsibility  of  a  single 
Executive  Magistrate,  for  some  plural  substitute,  which,  by  dividing  so  great 
a  trust,  might  lessen  the  danger  of  it ;  or,  suffering  so  great  an  accumulation 
of  powers  in  the  hands  of  that  officer,  as  might  by  degrees  transform  him  into 
a  monarch.  The  incompetency  of  one  Legislature  to  regulate  all  the  various 
objects  belonging  to  the  local  governments,  would  evidently  force  a  transfer 
of  many  of  them  to  the  Executive  department;  whilst  the  increasing  splendour 
and  number  of  its  prerogatives,  supplied  by  this  source,  might  prove  excite- 
ments to  ambition  too  powerful  for  a  sober  execution  of  the  elective  plan,  and 
consecpuently  strengthen  the  pretexts  for  an  hereditary  designation  of  the 
magistrate.  Second.  Were  the  State  governments  abolished,  the  same  space 
of  country  that  would  produce  an  undue  growth  of  the  executive  power,  would 
prevent  that  control  on  the  Legislative  body  which  is  essential  to  a  faithful 
discharge  of  its  trust ;  neither  the  voice  nor  the  sense  of  ten  or  twenty  millions 
of  people,  spread  through  so  many  latitudes  as  are  comprehended  within  the 
United  States,  could  ever  be  combined  or  called  into  effect,  if  deprived  of  those 
local  organs,  through  which  both  can  now  be  conveyed.  In  such  a  state  of 
things,  the  impossibility  of  acting  together  might  be  succeeded  by  the  ineffi- 
cacy  of  partial  expressions  of  the  public  mind,  and  this  at  length,  by  a  univer- 
sal silence  and  insensibility,  leaving  the  whole  government  to  that  self  directed 
course  which,  it  must  be  owned,  is  the  natural  propensity  of  every  govern- 
ment. 

But  if  a  consolidation  of  the  States  into  one  government  be  an  event  so 
justly  to  be  avoided,  it  is  not  less  to  be  desired,  on  the  other  hand,  that  a  con- 
solidation should  prevail  in  their  interests  and  affections ;  and  this,  too,  as  it 
fortunately  happens,  for  the  veiy  reasons,  among  others,  which  lie  against  a 
governmental  consolidation.  For,  in  the  first  place,  in  proportion  as  uniform- 
ity is  found  to  prevail  in  the  interests  and  sentiments  of  the  several  States,  will 
be  the  practicability  of  accommodating  Legislative  regulations  to  them,  and 
thereby  of  withholding  new  and  dangerous  prerogatives  from  the  Executive. 
Again,  the  greater  the  mutual  confidence  and  affection  of  all  parts  of  the 
Union,  the  more  likely  they  will  be  to  concur  amicably,  or  to  differ  with,  mod- 
eration, in  the  elective  designation  of  the  Chief  Magistrate,  and  by  such  exam- 
ples to  guard  and  adorn  the  vital  principle  of  our  republican  Constitution. 
Lastly,  the  less  the  supposed  difference  of  interests,  and  the  greater  the  con- 
cord and  confidence  throughout  the  great  body  of  the  people,  the  more  readily 
must  they  sympathize  with  each  other;  the  more  seasonably  can  they  inter- 
pose a  common  manifestation  of  their  sentiments ;  the  more  certainly  will  they 
take  the  alarm  at  usurpation  or  oppression;  and  the  more  effectually  will  they 
consolidate  their  defence  of  the  public  liberty. 

Here,  then,  is  a  proper  object  presented,  both  to  those  who  are  most  jealously 
attached  to  the  separate  authority  reserved  to  the  States,  and  to  those  who  may 


460  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1791. 

be  more  inclined  to  contemplate  the  people  of  America  in  the  light  of  one  na- 
tion. Let  the  former  contiuue  to  watch  against  every  encroachment  which 
might  lead  to  a  gradual  consolidation  of  the  States  into  one  government.  Let 
the  latter  employ  their  utmost  zeal,  by  eradicating  local  prejudices  and  mista- 
ken rivalships,  to  consolidate  the  affairs  of  the  States  into  one  harmonious  in- 
terest ;  and  let  it  be  the  patriotic  study  of  all  to  maintain  the  various  authori- 
ties established  by  our  complicated  system,  each  in  its  respective  constitutional 
sphere,  and  to  erect  over  the  whole  one  paramount  empire  of  reason,  benev- 
olence and  brotherly  affection. 
Philadelphia,  Dec.  3. 


3.  Pcblic  Opinion. 

Public  opinion  sets  bounds  to  every  government,  and  is  the  real  sovereign 
in  every  free  one. 

As  there  are  cases  where  the  public  opinion  must  be  obeyed  by  the  govern- 
ment ;  so  there  are  cases  where,  not  being  fixed,  it  may  be  influened  by  the 
government.  This  distinction,  if  kept  in  view,  would  prevent  or  decide  many 
debates  on  the  respect  due  from  the  government  to  the  sentiments  of  the 
people. 

In  proportion  as  government  is  influenced  by  opinion,  it  must  be  so  by 
whatever  influences  opinion.  This  decides  the  question  concerning  a  Consti- 
tutional Declaration  of  Rights,  which  requires  an  influence  on  government, 
by  becoming  a  part  of  the  public  opinion. 

The  larger  a  country  the  less  easy  for  its  real  opinion  to  be  ascertained,  and 
the  less  difficult  to  be  counterfeited  ;  when  ascertained  or  presumed,  the  more 
respectable  it  is  in  the  eyes  of  individuals.  This  is  favorable  to  the  authority 
of  government.  For  the  same  reason,  the  more  extensive  a  country  the  more 
insignificant  is  each  individual  in  his  own  eyes.  This  may  be  unfavorable  to 
liberty. 

Whatever  facilitates  a  general  intercourse  of  sentiments,  as  good  roads,  do- 
mestic commerce,  a  free  press,  and  particularly  a  circulation  of  newspapers 
through  the  entire  body  of  the  people,  and  Representatives  going  from,  and 
returning  among,  every  part  of  them,  is  equivalent  to  a  contraction  of  territo- 
rial limits,  and  is  favorable  to  liberty,  where  these  may  be  too  extensive. 


4.  Money. 

[Observations  written  posterior  to  the  Circular  Address  of  Congress  in  Sept., 
1779,  and  prior  to  their  act  of  March,  1780.] 

It  has  been  taken  for  an  axiom  in  all  our  reasonings  on  the  subject  of  finance, 
that  supposing  the  quantity  and  demand  of  things  vendible  in  a  country  to  re- 


"1791.  MONEY.  461 

main  the  same,  their  price  will  vary  according  to  the  variation  in  the  quantity 
of  the  circulating  medium ;  in  other  words,  that  the  value  of  money  will  be 
regulated  by  its  quantity.  I  shall  submit  to  the  judgment  of  the  public  some  con- 
siderations which  determine  mine  to  reject  the  proposition  as  founded  in  erroi 
Should  they  be  deemed  not  absolutely  conclusive,  they  seem  at  least  to  shew 
that  it  is  liable  to  too  many  exceptions  and  restrictions  to  be  taken  for  granted 
as  a  fundamental  truth.  If  the  circulating  medium  be  of  universal  value,  as 
specie,  a  local  increase  or  decrease  of  its  quantity  will  not,  whilst  a  communi- 
cation subsists  with  other  countries,  produce  a  correspondent  rise  or  fall  in  its 
value.  The  reason  is  obvious.  When  a  redundancy  of  universal  money  pre- 
vails in  any  one  country,  the  holders  of  it  know  their  interest  too  well  to  waste 
it  in  extravagant  prices,  when  it  would  be  worth  so  much  more  to  them  else 
where.  When  a  deficiency  happens,  those  who  hold  commodities,  rather  than 
part  with  them  at  an  undervalue  in  one  country,  would  carry  them  to  another. 
The  variation  of  prices  in  these  cases  cannot,  therefore,  exceed  the  expense 
and  insurance  of  transportation. 

Suppose  a  country,  totally  unconnected  with  Europe  or  with  any  other  coun- 
try, to  possess  specie  in  the  same  proportion  to  circulating  property  that  Europe 
does,  prices  there  would  correspond  with  those  in  Europe.  Suppose  that  so 
much  specie  were  thrown  into  circulation  as  to  make  the  quantity  exceed  the 
proportion  of  Europe  tenfold,  without  any  change  in  commodities,  or  in  the 
demand  for  them ;  as  soon  as  such  an  augmentation  had  produced  its  effect, 
prices  would  rise  tenfold,  or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  money  would  be  depre- 
ciated tenfold.  In  this  state  of  things,  suppose  again  that  a  free  and  ready 
communication  were  opened  between  this  country  and  Europe,  and  that  the 
inhabitants  of  the  former  were  made  sensible  of  the  value  of  their  money  in 
the  latter,  would  not  its  value  among  themselves  immediately  cease  to  be  regu- 
lated by  its  quantity,  and  assimilate  itself  to  the  foreign  value  ? 

Mr.  Hume,  in  his  discourse  on  the  balance  of  trade,  supposes  "that  if  four- 
fifths  of  all  the  money  in  Britain  were  annihilated  in  one  night,  and  the  nation 
reduced  to  the  same  condition  in  this  particular  as  in  the  reigns  of  the  Harrys 
and  Edwards,  that  the  price  of  all  labour  and  commodities  would  sink  in  pro- 
portion, and  everything  be  sold  as  cheap  as  in  those  ages.  That,  again,  if  all 
the  money  in  Britain  were  multiplied  fivefold  in  one  night,  a  contrary  effect 
would  follow."  This  very  ingenious  writer  seems  not  to  have  considered  that 
in  the  reigns  of  the  Harrys  and  Edwards  the  state  of  prices  in  the  circumjacent 
nations  corresponded  with  that  of  Britain ;  whereas,  in  both  of  his  suppositions 
it  would  be  no  less  than  four-fifths  differeut.  Imagine  that  such  a  difference 
really  existed,  and  remark  the  consequence.  Trade  is  at  present  carried  on 
between  Britain  and  the  rest  of  Europe,  at  a  profit  of  15  or  20  per  cent.  Were 
that  profit  raised  to  400  per  cent.,  would  not  their  home  market,  in  case  of  such 
a  fall  of  prices,  be  so  exhausted  by  exportation,  and  in  case  of  such  a  rise  of 
prices,  be  so  overstocked  with  foreign  commodities,  as  immediately  to  restore 


4G2  "WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1701. 

the  general  equilibrium?  Now,  to  borrow  the  language  of  the  same  author, 
"  the  same  causes  which  would  redress  the  inequality,  were  it  to  happen,  must 
forever  prevent  it,  without  some  violent  external  operation." 

The  situation  of  a  country  connected  by  commercial  intercourse  with  other 
countries,  may  be  compared  to  a  single  town  or  province  whose  intercourse 
with  other  towns  and  provinces  results  from  political  connexion.  Will  it  be 
pretended  that  if  the  national  currency  were  to  be  accumulated  in  a  single 
town  or  province,  so  as  to  exceed  its  due  proportion  five  or  tenfold,  a  corres- 
pondent depreciation  would  ensue,  and  everything  be  sold  five  or  ten  times 
as  dear  as  in  a  neighboring  town  or  province? 

If  the  circulating  medium  be  a  municipal  one,  as  paper  currency,  still  its 
value  does  not  depend  on  its  quantity.  It  depends  on  the  credit  of  the  State 
issuing  it,  and  on  the  time  of  its  redemption;  and  is  no  otherwise  affected  by 
the  quantity  than  as  the  quantity  may  be  supposed  to  endanger  or  postpone 
the  redemption. 

That  it  depends  in  part  on  the  credit  of  the  issuer,  no  one  will  deny.  If  the 
credit  of  the  issuer,  therefore,  be  perfectly  unsuspected,  the  time  of  redemption 
alone  will  regulate  its  value.  To  support  what  is  here  advanced,  it  is  suffi- 
cient to  appeal  to  the  nature  of  paper  money.  It  consists  of  bills  or  notes  of 
obligation  payable  in  specie  to  the  bearer,  either  on  demand  or  at  a  future 
day.  Of  the  first  kind  is  the  paper  currency  of  Britain,  and  hence  its  equiv- 
alence to  specie.  Of  the  latter  kind  is  the  paper  currency  of  the  United  States, 
and  hence  its  inferiority  to  specie.  But  if  its  being  redeemable,  not  on  de- 
mand, but  at  a  future  day,  be  the  cause  of  its  inferiority,  the  distance  of  that 
day,  and  not  its  quantity,  ought  to  be  the  measure  of  that  inferiority.  It  has 
been  shewn  that  the  value  of  specie  does  not  fluctuate  according  to  local  fluc- 
tuations in  its  quantity.  Great  Britain,  in  which  there  is  such  an  immensity 
of  circulating  paper,  shews  that  the  value  of  paper  depends  as  little  on  its 
quantity  as  that  of  specie,  when  the  paper  represents  specie  payable  on  de- 
mand. Let  us  suppose  that  the  circulating  notes  of  Great  Britain,  instead  of 
being  payable  on  demand,  were  to  be  redeemed  at  a  future  day,  at  the  end  of 
one  year  for  example,  and  that  no  interest  was  due  on  them.  If  the  same 
assurance  prevailed  that  at  the  end  of  the  year  they  would  be  equivalent  to 
specie,  as  now  prevails  that  they  are  every  moment  equivalent,  would  any 
other  effect  result  from  such  a  change,  except  that  the  notes  would  suffer  a 
depreciation  equal  to  one  year's  interest?  They  would  in  that  case  represent, 
not  the  nominal  sum  expressed  on  the  face  of  them,  but  the  sum  remaining 
after  a  deduction  of  one  year's  interest.  But  if,  when  they  represent  the  full 
nominal  sum  of  specie,  their  circulation  contributes  no  more  to  depreciate 
them  than  the  circulation  of  the  specie  itself  would  do,  does  it  not  follow,  that 
if  they  represented  a  sum  of  specie  less  than  the  nominal  inscription,  their  cir- 
culation ought  to  depreciate  them  no  more  than  so  much  specie,  if  substituted, 
would  depreciate  itself?     We  may  extend  the  time  from  one  to  five,  or  tu 


1791.  MONEY.  4G3 

twenty  years  ;  but  we  shall  find  no  other  rule  of  depreciation  than  the  loss  of  the 
intermediate  interest.  What  has  been  here  supposed  with  respect  to  Great 
Britain  has  actually  taken  place  in  the  United  States.  Being  engaged  in  a 
necessary  war  without  specie  to  defray  the  expense,  or  to  support  paper  emis- 
sions for  that  purpose  redeemable  on  demand,  and  being,  at  the  same  time, 
unable  to  borrow,  no  resource  was  left  but  to  emit  bills  of  credit  to  be  redeemed 
in  future.  The  inferiority  of  these  bills  to  specie  was,  therefore,  incident  to 
the  very  nature  of  them.  If  they  had  been  exchangeable  on  demand  for  specie, 
they  would  have  been  equivalent  to  it ;  as  they  were  not  exchangeable  on  de- 
mand, they  were  inferior  to  it.  The  degree  of  their  inferiority  must  conse- 
quently be  estimated  by  the  time  of  their  becoming  exchangeable  for  specie — 
that  is,  the  time  of  their  redemption.  To  make  it  still  more  palpable  that  the 
value  of  our  currency  does  not  depend  on  its  quantity,  let  us  put  the  case  that 
Congress  had,  during  the  first  year  of  the  war,  emitted  five  millions  of  dollars 
to  be  redeemed  at  the  end  of  ten  years  ;  that,  during  the  second  year  of  the 
war,  they  had  emitted  ten  millions  more,  but  with  due  security  that  the  whole 
fifteen  millions  should  be  redeemed  in  five  years  ;  that,  during  the  two  suc- 
ceeding years,  they  had  augmented  the  emissions  to  one  hundred  millions,  but 
from  the  discovery  of  some  extraordinary  sources  of  wealth,  had  been  able  to 
engage  for  the  redemption  of  the  whole  sum  in  one  year :  it  is  asked  whether 
the  depreciation  under  these  circumstances  would  have  increased  as  the  quan- 
tity of  money  increased,  or  whether,  on  the  contrary,  the  money  would  not 
have  risen  in  value  at  every  accession  to  its  quantity  ? 

It  has,  indeed,  happened  that  a  progressive  depreciation  of  our  currency  has 
accompanied  its  growing  quantity ;  and  to  this  is  probably  owing  in  a  great 
measure  the  prevalence  of  the  doctrine  here  opposed.  When  the  fact,  how- 
ever, is  explained,  it  will  be  found  to  coincide  perfectly  with  what  has  been 
said.  Every  one  must  have  taken  notice  that,  in  the  emissions  of  Congress, 
no  precise  time  has  been  stipulated  for  their  redemption,  nor  any  specific  pro- 
vision made  for  that  purpose.  A  general  promise  entitling  the  bearer  to  so 
many  dollars  of  metal  as  the  paper  bills  express,  has  been  the  only  basis  of 
their  credit.  Every  one,  therefore,  has  been  left  to  his  own  conjectures  as  to 
the  time  the  redemption  would  be  fulfilled  ;  and  as  every  addition  made  to  the 
quantity  in  circulation  would  naturally  be  supposed  to  remove  to  a  propor- 
tionally greater  distance  the  redemption  of  the  whole  mass,  it  could  not  happen 
otherwise  than  that  every  additional  emission  would  be  followed  by  a  further 
depreciation. 

In  like  manner  has  the  effect  of  a  distrust  of  public  credit,  the  other  source 
of  depreciation,  been  erroneously  imputed  to  the  quantity  of  money.  The  cir- 
cumstances under  which  our  early  emissions  were  made  could  not  but  strongly 
concur  with  the  futurity  of  their  redemption  to  debase  their  value.  The  situa- 
tion of  the  United  States  resembled  that  of  an  individual  engaged  in  an  ex- 
pensive undertaking  carried  on,  for  want  of  cash,  with  bonds  and  notes  secured 


4G4  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1791. 

on  an  estate  to  which  his  title  was  disputed,  and  who  had,  besides,  a  combina- 
tion of  enemies  employing  every  artifice  to  disparage  that  security.  A  train 
of  sinister  events  during  the  early  stages  of  the  war  likewise  contributed  to 
increase  the  distrust  of  the  public  ability  to  fulfil  their  engagements.  Before 
the  depreciation  arising  from  this  cause  was  removed  by  the  success  of  our 
arms,  and  our  alliance'  with  France,  it  had  drawn  SO  large  a  quantity  into  cir- 
culation, that  the  quantity  itself  soon  after  begat  a  distrust  of  the  public  dis- 
position to  fulfil  their  engagements,  as  well  as  new  doubts,  in  timid  minds, 
concerning  the  issue  of  the  contest.  From  that  period,  this  cause  of 
tion  has  been  incessantly  operating.  It  has  first  conduced  to  swell  the 
amount  of  necessary  emissions,  and  from  that  very  amount  has  derived  new 
force  and  efficacy  to  itself.  Thus,  a  further  discredit  of  our  money  has  neces- 
sarily followed  the  augmentation  of  its  quantity  ;  but  every  one  must  perceive 
that  it  has  not  been  the  effect  of  the  quantity  considered  in  itself,  but  consid- 
ered as  an  omen  of  public  bankruptcy.*     Whether  the  money  of  a  country, 


*  As  the  depreciation  of  our  money  has  been  ascribed  to  a  wrong  cause,  so,  it  may  be  remarked, 
have  effects  been  ascribed  to  the  depreciation,  which  result  from  other  causes.  Money  is  the  in- 
strument by  which  mens'  wants  are  supplied,  and  many  how  possess  it  will  part  with  it  for  that 
purpose,  who  would  not  gratify  themselves  at  the  expense  of  their  visible  property.  Many,  also, 
may  acquire  it  who  have  no  visible  property.  By  increasing  the  quantity  of  money ,  therefore,  you 
both  increase  the  means  of  spending,  and  stimulate  the  desire  to  spend;  and  if  the  objects  desired 
do  not  increase  in  proportion,  their  price  must  rise  from  the  influence  of  the  greater  demand  for 
them.  Should  the  objects  in  demand  happen,  at  the  same  juncture,  as  in  the  United  States,  to  be- 
come scarcer,  their  prices  must  rise  in  a  double  proportion. 

It  is  by  this  influence  of  an  augmentation  of  money  on  demand  that  we  ought  to  account  for  that 
proportional  level  of  money,  in  all  countries,  which  Mr.  Hume  attributes  to  its  direct  influence  on 
prices.  When  an  augmentation  of  the  national  coin  takes  place,  it  may  be  supposed  either,  1.  Not 
to  augment  demand  at  all;  or,  2.  To  augment  it  so  gradually  that  a  proportional  increase  of  indus- 
try will  supply  the  objects  of  it;  or,  3.  To  augment  it  so  rapidly  that  the  domestic  market  may 
prove  inadequate,  whilst  the-  taste  lor  distinction,  natural  to  wealth,  inspires,  at  the  same  time,  a 
preference  for  foreign  luxuries.  The  first  case  can  seldom  happen.  Were  it  to  happen,  no  chance 
in  prices  nor  any  efflux  of  money  would  ensue,  unless,  indeed,  it  should  be  empkrj  ed  or  loaned 
abroad.  The  superfluous  portiou  would  be  either  hoarded  or  turned  into  plate.  The  second  caso 
can  occur  only  where  the  augmentation  of  money  advances  with  a  very  slow  and  equable  pace, 
and  would  be  attended  neither  with  a  rise  of  prices,  nor  with  a  superfluity  of  money.  The  third 
is  the  only  case  in  which  the  plenty  of  money  would  occasion  it  to  overflow  into  other  countries. 
The  insufficiency  of  the  home  market  to  satisfy  the  demand  would  be  supplied  from  such  countries 
as  might  afford  the  articles  in  demand;  and  the  money  woidd  thus  be  drained  off,  till  that,  and  tho 
demand  excited  by  it,  should  fall  to  a  proper  level,  and  a  balance  he  thereby  restored  between 
exports  and  imports. 

The  principle  on  which  Mr.  Hume's  theory,  and  that  of  Montesquieu  before  him,  is  founded,  is 
manifestly  erroneous.  Ho  considers  the  money  in  every  country  as  the  representative  of  tho 
whole  circulating  property  and  industry  in  the  country,  and  thence  concludes  that  every  variation 
in  its  quantity  must  increase  or  lessen  the  portion  which  represents  the  same  portion  of  property 
and  labor.  The  error  lies  in  supposing  that,  because  money  serves  to  measure  the  value  el  all 
things,  it  represents  and  is  equal  in  value  to  all  things.  The  circulating  property  in  every  country, 
according  to  it3  market  rate,  far  exceeds  the  amount  of  its  money.  At  Athens,  oxen;  at  Home, 
sheep,  were  once  used  as  a  measure  of  the  value  of  other  thiugs.  It  will  hardly  be  supposed  they 
were  therefore  equal  in  value  to  all  other  things. 


1791.  MONEY.  465 

then,  be  gold  and  silver,  or  paper  currency,  it  appears  that  its  value  is  not 
regulated  by  its  quantity.  If  it  be  the  former,  its  value  depends  on  the  gen 
era!  proportion  of  gold  and  silver  to  circulating  property  throughout  all  coun- 
tries having   free  intercommunication.     If  the  latter,  it  depends  on  the  credit 

of  the  State  issuing  it,  and  the  time  at  which  it  is  to  become  equal  to  gold 
and  silver. 

Every  circumstance  which  has  been  found  to  accelerate  the  depreciation 
of  our  currency  naturally  resolves  itself  into  these  general  principles.  The 
spirit  of  monopoly  hath  affected  it  in  no  other  way  than  by  creating  an  artifi- 
cial scarcity  of  commodities  wanted  for  public  use,  the  consequence  of  which 
has  been  an  increase  of  their  price,  and  of  the  necessary  emissions.  Now  it 
is  this  increase  of  emissions  which  has  been  shewn  to  lengthen  the  supposed 
period  of  their  redemption,  and  to  foster  suspicions  of  public  credit.  Monopo- 
lies destroy  the  natural  relation  between  money  and  commodities ;  but  it  is  by 
raising  the  value  of  the  latter,  not  by  debasing  that  of  the  former.  Had  our 
money  been  gold  or  silver,  the  same  prevalence  of  monopoly  would  have  had 
the  same  effect  on  prices  and  expenditures,  but  these  would  not  have  had  the 
same  effect  on  the  value  of  money. 

The  depreciation  of  our  money  has  been  charged  on  misconduct  in  the  pur- 
chasing departments ;  but  this  misconduct  must  have  operated  in  the  same 
manner  as  the  spirit  of  monopoly.  By  unnecessarily  raising  the  price  of  arti- 
cles required  for  public  use,  it  has  swelled  the  amount  of  necessary  emissions, 
on  which  has  depended  the  general  opinion  concerning  the  time  and  the  proba- 
bility of  their  redemption. 

The  same  remark  may  be  applied  to  the  deficiency  of  imported  commodities. 
The  deficiency  of  these  commodities  has  raised  the  price  of  them ;  the  rise  of 
their  price  has  increased  the  emissions  for  purchasing  them,  and  with  the  in- 
crease of  emissions,  have  increased  suspicions  concerning  their  redemption. 

Those  who  consider  the  quantity  of  money  as  the  criterion  of  its  value,  com- 
pute the  intrinsic  depreciation  of  our  currency  by  dividing  the  whole  mass  by 
the  supposed  necessary  medium  of  circulation.  Thus  supposing  the  medium 
necessary  for  the  United  States  to  be  30,000,000  dollars,  and  the  circulating 
emissions  to  be  200,000,000,  the  intrinsic  difference  between  paper  and  specie 
will  be  nearly  as  7  for  1.  If  its  value  depends  on  the  time  of  its  redemption, 
as  hath  been  above  maintained,  the  real  difference  will  be  found  to  be  consid- 
erably less.  Suppose  the  period  necessary  for  its  redemption  to  be  18  years, 
as  seems  to  be  understood  by  Congress,  100  dollars  of  paper  18  years  hence 
will  be  equal  in  value  to  100  dollars  of  specie;  for  at  the  end  of  that  term  100 
dollars  of  specie  may  be  demanded  for  them.  They  must,  consequently,  at 
this  time,  be  equal  to  as  much  specie  as,  with  compound  interest,  will  amount 
in  that  number  of  years  to  100  dollars.  If  the  interest  of  money  be  rated  at 
5  per  cent.,  this  present  sum  of  specie  will  be  about  41  £  dollars.  Admit,  how- 
ever, the  use  of  money  to  be  worth  6  per  cent.,  about  35  dollars  will  then 
VOL.   IV.  30 


4G0  WORKS     OF    MADISON.  1791. 

amount  In  18  years  to  100:  .">.">  dollars  of  specie,  therefore,  is  al  this  time  equal 

to  100  of  paper;  that  is,  the  man  who  would  exchange  his  specie  for  paper  at 
this  discount,  and  lock  it  in  his  desk  for  18  years,  would  get  6  per  cent,  for 
his  money.  The  proportion  of  100  to  35  is  less  than  3  to  1.  The  intrinsic 
depreciation  of  our  money,  therefore,  according  to  this  rule  of  computation,  i3 
less  than  3  to  1,  instead  of  7  to  1,  according  to  the  rule  espoused  in  the  circu- 
lar address,  or  of  30  or  40  to  1  according  to  its  currency  in  the  market. 

I  shall  conclude  with  observing  that,  if  the  preceding  principles  and  reason- 
in^  be  just,  the  plan  on  which  our  domestic  loans  have  been  obtained  must 
have  operated  in  a  manner  directly  contrary  to  what  was  intended.  A  loan 
office  certificate  differs  in  nothing  from  a  common  bill  of  credit,  except  in  its 
higher  denomination,  and  in  the  interest  allowed  on  it;  and  the  interest  is  al- 
lowed merely  as  a  compensation  to  the  lender  for  exchanging  a  number  of 
small  bills,  which,  being  easily  transferable,  are  most  convenient,  for  a  single 
one  so  large  as  not  to  be  transferable  in  ordinary  transactions.  As  the  cer- 
tificates, however,  do  circulate  in  many  of  the  more  considerable  transactions, 
it  may  justly  be  questioned,  even  on  the  supposition  that  the  value  of  money 
depended  on  its  quantity,  whether  the  advantage  to  the  public  from  the  ex- 
change would  justify  the  terms  of  it.  But  dismissing  this  consideration,  I 
ask  whether  such  loans  do  in  any  shape  lessen  the  public  debt,  and  thereby 
render  the  discharge  of  it  less  suspected  or  less  remote?  Do  they  give  any 
new  assurance  that  a  paper  dollar  will  be  one  day  equal  to  a  silver  dollar,  or 
do  they  shorten  the  distance  of  that  day?  Far  from  it.  The  certificates  con- 
stitute a  part  of  the  public  debt  no  less  than  the  bills  of  credit  exchanged  for 
them,  and  have  an  equal  claim  to  redemption  within  the  general  period ;  nay, 
are  to  be  paid  off  long  before  the  expiration  of  that  period  with  bills  of  credit, 
which  will  thus  return  into  the  general  mass,  to  be  redeemed  along  with  it. 
Were  these  bills,  therefore,  not  to  be  taken  out  of  circulation  at  all,  by  means 
of  the  certificates,  not  only  the  expense  of  offices  for  exchanging,  re-exchang- 
ing, and  annually  paying  the  interest  would  be  avoided,  but  the  whole  sum 
of  interest  would  be  saved,  which  must  make  a  formidable  addition  to  the 
public  emissions,  protract  the  period  of  their  redemption,  and  proportionally 
increase  their  depreciation.  No  expedient  could,  perhaps,  have  been  devised 
more  preposterous  and  unlucky.  In  order  to  relieve  public  credit,  sinking  un- 
der the  weight  of  an  enormous  debt,  we  invent  new  expenditures.  In  order  to 
raise  the  value  of  our  money,  which  depends  on  the  time  of  its  redemption, 
we  have  recourse  to  a  measure  which  removes  its  redemption  to  a  more  dis- 
tant day.  Instead  of  paying  off  the  capital  to  the  public  credits,  we  give 
them  an  enormous  interest  to  change  the  name  of  the  bit  of  paper  which 
expresses  the  sum  due  to  them  ;  and  think  it  a  piece  of  dexterity  in  finance, 
by  emitting  loan  office  certificates,  to  elude  the  necessity  of  emitting  bills  of 
credit. 


1792.  CHARTERS.  457 


5.  Government. 

In  Monarchies  there  is  a  twofold  danger:  1st.  That  the  eyes  of  a  good 
prince  cannot  see  all  that  he  ought  to  know.  2nd.  That  the  hands  of  a  bad 
one  will  not  be  tied  by  the  fear  of  combinations  against  him.  Both  these  evils 
increase  with  the  extent  of  domain  ;  and  prove,  contrary  to  the  received  opin- 
ion, that  monarchy  is  even  more  unfit  for  a  great  State  than  for  a  small  one, 
notwithstanding  the  greater  tendency  in  the  former  to  that  species  of  govern- 
ment. Aristocracies,  on  the  other  hand,  are  generally  seen  in  small  States ; 
where  a  concentration  of  the  public  will  is  required  by  external  danger,  and 
that  degree  of  concentration  is  found  sufficient.  The  many,  in  such  cases, 
cannot  govern  on  account  of  emergencies  which  require  the  promptitude  and 
precautions  of  &  few,  whilst  the  few  themselves  resist  the  usurpations  of  a  sin- 
gle tyrant.  In  Thessaly,  a  country  intersected  by  mountainous  barriers  into 
a  number  of  small  cantons,  the  governments,  according  to  Thucydides,  were 
in  most  instances  oligarchical.  Switzerland  furnishes  similar  examples.  The 
smaller  the  State  the  less  intolerable  is  this  form  of  government,  its  rigors 
being  tempered  by  the  facility  and  the  fear  of  combinations  among  the 
people. 

A  Republic  involves  the  idea  of  popular  rights.  A  representative  Republic 
chooses  the  wisdom  of  which  hereditary  aristocracy  has  the  chance;  whilst  it 
excludes  the  oppression  of  that  form.  And  a  confederated  Republic  attains 
the  force  of  monarchy,  whilst  it  equally  avoids  the  ignorance  of  a  good  prince 
and  the  oppression  of  a  bad  one.  To  secure  all  the  advantages  of  such  a  sys- 
tem, every  good  citizen  will  be  at  once  a  sentinel  over  the  rights  of  the  people, 
over  the  authorities  of  the  confederal  government,  and  over  both  the  rights 
and  the  authorities  of  the  intermediate  governments. 

December  31. 


6.  Charters. 

In  Europe  charters  of  liberty  have  been  granted  by  power.  America  has 
set  the  example,  and  France  has  followed  it,  of  charters  of  power  granted  by 
liberty.  This  revolution  in  the  practice  of  the  world  may,  with  an  honest 
praise,  be  pronounced  the  most  triumphant  epoch  of  its  history,  and  the  most 
consoling  presage  of  its  happiness.  We  look  back  already,  with  astonishment, 
at  the  daring  outrages  committed  by  despotism  on  the  reason  and  the  rights 
of  man;  we  look  forward  with  joy  to  the  period  when  it  shall  be  despoiled  of 
all  its  usurpations,  and  bound  forever  in  the  chains  with  which  it  had  loaded 
its  miserable  victims. 

In  proportion  to  the  value  of  this  revolution  ;  in  proportion  to  the  importance 
of  instruments,  every  word  of  which  decides  a  question  between  power  and 


468  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1792. 

liberty,  in  proportion  to  the  solemnity  of  aets  proclaiming  the  will,  and  au- 
thenticated by  the  seal  of  the  people,  the  only  earthly  source  of  authority, 
ought  to  be  the  vigilance  with  which  they  are  guarded  by  every  citizen  in  pri- 
vate life,  and  the  circumspection  with  which  they  are  executed  by  every  citizen 
in  public  trust. 

As  compacts,  charters  of  government  are  superior  in  obligation  to  all  others, 
because  they  give  effect  to  all  others.  As  trusts,  none  can  be  more  sacred, 
because  they  are  bound  on  the  conscience  by  the  religious  sanctions  of  an 
oath.  As  metes  and  bounds  of  government,  they  transcend  all  other  land- 
marks, because  every  public  usurpation  is  an  encroachment  on  the  private 
right,  not  of  one,  but  of  all. 

The  citizens  of  the  United  States  have  peculiar  motives  to  support  the  energy 
of  their  constitutional  charters. 

Having  originated  the  experiment,  their  merit  will  be  estimated  by  its 
success. 

The  complicated  form  of  their  political  ?y=tem.  arising  from  the  partition  of 
government  between  the  States  and  the  Union,  and  from  the  separations  and 
subdivisions  of  the  several  departments  in  each,  requires  a  more  than  common 
reverence  for  the  authority  which  is  to  preserve  order  through  the  whole. 

Being  republicans,  they  must  be  anxious  to  establish  the  efficacy  of  popular 
charters  in  defending  liberty  against  power,  and  power  against  licentiousness, 
and  in  keeping  every  portion  of  power  within  its  proper  limits ;  by  this  means 
discomfiting  the  partisans  of  anti-republican  contrivances  for  the  purpose. 

All  power  has  been  traced  up  to  opinion.  The  stability  of  all  Governments 
and  security  of  all  rights  may  be  traced  to  the  same  source.  The  most  arbi- 
trary government  is  controlled  where  the  public  opinion  is  fixed.  The  despot 
of  Constantinople  dares  not  lay  a  new  tax  because  every  slave  thinks  he  ought 
not.  The  most  systematic  governments  are  turned  by  the  slightest  impulse 
from  their  regular  path,  when  the  public  opinion  no  longer  holds  them  in  it. 
We  see  at  this  moment  the  Executive  Magistrate  of  Great  Britain  exercising, 
under  the  authority  of  the  representatives  of  the  people,  a  legislative  power  over 
the  West  India  commerce. 

How  devoutly  is  it  to  be  wished,  then,  that  the  public  opinion  of  the  United 
States  should  be  enlightened  ;  that  it  should  attach  itself  to  their  governments 
as  delineated  in  the  great  charters,  derived  not  from  the  usurped  power  of  kings, 
but  from  the  legitimate  authority  of  the  people  ;  and  that  it  should  guarantee, 
with  a  holy  zeal,  these  political  scriptures  from  every  attempt  to  add  to  or 
diminish  from  them.  Liberty  and  order  will  never  be  perfectly  safe  until  a 
trespass  on  the  constitutional  provisions  for  either  shall  be  felt  with  the  same 
keenness  that  resents  an  invasion  of  the  dearest  rights,  until  every  citizen  shall 
be  an  Argus  to  espv  and  an  ^geo\  to  avenge  the  unhallowed  deed. 

January  18. 


1792.  BRITISH    GOVERNMENT.  469 


7.  Pat.: 

In  everv  political  society  parties  are  unavoidable.  A  difference  of  intei 
real  or  supposed,  is  the  most  natural  and  fruitful  source  of  them.  The  great 
object  should  be  to  combat  the  evil:  1.  By  establishing  a  political  equality 
among  all.  2.  Bv  withholding  unnecessary  opportunities  from  a  few  to  in- 
crease the  iuequalitv  of  property  by  an  immoderate,  and  especially  an  unmer- 
ited, accumulation  of  riches.  3.  By  the  silent  operation  of  laws  which,  without 
violating  the  rights  of  property,  reduce  extreme  wealth  towards  a  state  of  me- 
dioeritv.  and  raise  extreme  indigence  toward;  a  state  of  comfort,  -i.  By  ab- 
staining from  measures  which  operate  differently  on  different  interests,  and 
particularly  such  as  favor  one  interest  at  the  expense  of  another.  5.  By  making 
one  partv  a  check  ou  the  other,  so  far  as  the  existence  of  parties  cann 
prevented  nor  their  views  accommodated.  If  this  is  not  the  language  of  rea- 
son, it  is  that  of  republicanism. 

In  all  political  societies  different  interests  and  parties  arise  out  of  the  nature 
of  things,  and  the  great  art  of  politicians  lies  in  making  them  cheeks  and  bal- 
ances to  each  other.  Let  us,  then,  increase  these  natural  distinction*,  by  favor- 
in"'  an  inequality  of  property;  and  let  us  add  to  them  artificial  distinctions,  by 
establishing  kings,  ana  nobles,  and  plebeians.  We  shall  then  have  the  more 
checks  to  oppose  to  each  other :  we  shall  then  have  the  more  scales  and  the 
more  weights  to  perfect  and  maintain  the  equilibrium.  This  is  as  little  the 
voice  of  reason  as  it  is  that  of  republicanism. 

From  the  expediency,  in  polities,  of  making  natural  parties  mutual  checks 
on  each  other,  to  infer  the  propriety  of  creating  artificial  parties  in  order  to 
form  them  into  mutual  checks,  is  not  less  absurd  than  it  would  be  in  ethics  to 
sav  that  new  vices  ought  to  be  promoted,  where  they  would  counteract  each 
other,  because  this  use  may  be  made  of  existing  vices. 


8.  British  Government. 

The  boasted  equilibrium  of  this  Government  (so  far  as  it  is  a  reality)  is 
maintained  less  by  the  distribution  of  its  powers  than  by  the  force  of  public 
opinion.  If  the  nation  were  in  favor  of  absolute  monarchy,  the  public  liberty 
would  soon  be  surrendered  by  their  representatives.  If  a  republican  form  of 
government  were  preferred,  how  could  the  monarch  resist  the  national  will  ? 
Were  the  public  opinion  neutral  only,  and  the  public  voice  silent,  ambition  in 
the  House  of  Commons  could  wrest  from  him  his  prerogatives,  or  the  a  v. 
of  its  members  might  sell  to  him  its  privileges. 

The  provision  required  for  the  civil  list  at  every  accession  of  a  king,  shows 
at  once  his  dependence  on  the  representative  branch  and  its  dependence  on  the 
public  opinion.  Were  this  establishment  to  be  made  from  year  to  year,  instead 


470  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1792. 

of  being  made  Tor  life,  (a  change  within  the  legislative  power,)  the  monarchy, 
unless  maintained  by  corruption,  would  dwindle  into  a  name.  In  the  present 
temper  of  the  nation,  however,  they  would  obstruct  such  a  change  by  taking 

side  with  their  king  against  their  representatives. 

Those  who  ascribe  the  preservation  of  the  British  Government  to  the  form 
in  which  its  powers  are  distributed  and  balanced,  forget  the  revolutions  which 
it  has  undergone.     Compare  its  primitive  with  its  present  form. 

A  king  at  the  head  of  7  or  800  barons,  sitting  together  in  their  own  right, 
or,  (admitting  another  hypothesis,)  some  in  their  own  right,  others  as  repre- 
sentatives of  a  few  lesser  barons,  but  still  sitting  together  as  a  single  House, 
and  the  judges  holding  their  offices  during  the  pleasure  of  the  King  ;  such  was 
the  British  Government  at  one  period. 

At  present,  a  King,  as  seen  at  the  head  of  a  Legislature,  consisting  of  two 
Houses,  each  jealous  of  the  other,  one  sitting  in  their  own  right,  the  other  rep- 
resenting the  people;  and  the  judges  forming  a  distinct  and  independent 
department. 

In  the  first  case,  the  judiciary  is  annexed  to  the  executive,  and  the  Legisla- 
ture not  even  formed  into  separate  branches.  In  the  second,  the  legislative, 
executive,  and  judiciary  are  distinct;  and  the  legislative  subdivided  in  rival 
branches. 

What  a  contrast  in  these  forms  ?  If  the  latter  be  self-balanced,  the  former 
could  have  no  balance  at  all.  Yet  the  former  subsisted  as  well  as  the  latter, 
and  lasted  longer  than  the  latter,  dating  it  from  1688,  has  been  tried. 

The  former  was  supported  by  the  opinion  and  circumstances  of  the  times, 
like  many  of  the  intermediate  variations  through  which  the  Government  has 
passed,  and  as  will  be  supported  the  future  forms  through  which  it  probablv 
remains  to  be  conducted  by  the  progress  of  reason  and  change  of  circum- 
stances. 

January  28. 


9.  Universal  Peace. 

Among  the  various  reforms  which  have  been  offered  to  the  world,  the  pro- 
jects for  universal  peace  have  done  the  greatest  honor  to  the  hearts,  though 
they  seem  to  have  done  very  little  to  the  heads,  of  their  authors. 

Rousseau,  the  most  distinguished  of  these  philanthopists,  has  recommended 
a  confederation  of  sovereigns,  under  a  council  of  deputies,  for  the  double  pur- 
pose of  arbitrating  external  controversies  among  nations,  and  of  guarantying 
their  respective  governments  against  internal  revolutions.  He  was  aware 
neither  of  the  impossibility  of  executing  his  pacific  plan  among  governments 
which  feel  so  many  allurements  to  war,  nor,  what  is  more  extraordinary,  of 
the  tendency  of  his  plan  to  perpetuate  arbitrary  power  wherever  it  existed  • 


1792.  UNIVERSAL    PEACE.  471 

and,  by  extinguishing  the  hope  of  one  day  seeing  an  end  of  oppression,  to  cut 
off  the  only  source  of  consolation  remaining  to  the  oppressed. 

A  universal  and  perpetual  peace,  it  is  to  be  feared,  is  in  the  catalogue  of 
events  which  will  never  exist  but  in  the  imaginations  of  visionary  philoso- 
phers, or  in  the  breasts  of  benevolent  enthusiasts.  It  is  still,  however,  true, 
thai  war  contains  so  much  folly,  as  well  as  wickedness,  that  much  is  to  be 
hoped  from  the  progress  of  reason  ;  and  if  anything  is  to  be  hoped,  everything 
ought  to  be  tried. 

Wars  may  be  divided  into  two  classes  :  one  flowing  from  the  mere  will  0* 
the  government;  the  other  according  with  the  will  of  the  society  itself. 

Those  of  the  first  class  can  no  otherwise  be  prevented  than  by  such  a  re- 
formation of  the  government  as  may  identify  its  will  with  the  will  of  the  so- 
ciety. The  project  of  Rousseau  was,  consequently,  as  preposterous  as  it  was 
impotent.  Instead  of  beginning  with  an  external  application,  and  even  pre- 
cluding internal  remedies,  he  ought  to  have  commenced  with,  and  chiefly  re- 
lied on,  the  latter  prescription. 

He  should  have  said,  whilst  war  is  to  depend  on  those  whose  ambition, 
whose  revenge,  whose  avidity,  or  whose  caprice  may  contradict  the  sentiment 
of  the  community,  and  yet  be  controlled  by  it ;  whilst  war  is  to  be  declared  by 
those  who  are  to  spend  the  public  money,  not  by  those  who  are  to  pay  it ;  by 
those  who  are  to  direct  the  public  forces,  not  by  those  who  are  to  support 
them  ;  by  those  whose  power  is  to  be  raised,  not  by  those  whose  chains  may 
be  riveted,  the  disease  must  continue  to  be  hereditary,  like  the  government  of 
which  it  is  the  offspring.  As  the  first  step  towards  a  cure,  the  government 
itself  must  be  regenerated.  Its  will  must  be  made  subordinate  to,  or  rather 
the  same  with,  the  will  of  the  community. 

Had  Rousseau  lived  to  see  the  Constitutions  of  the  United  States  and  of 
France,  his  judgment  might  have  escaped  the  censure  to  which  his  project 
has  exposed  it. 

The  other  class  of  wars,  corresponding  with  the  public  will,  are  less  suscep- 
tible of  remedy. 

There  are  antidotes,  nevertheless,  which  may  not  be  without  their  efficacy. 
As  wars  of  the  first  class  were  to  be  prevented  by  subjecting  the  will  of  the 
government  to  the  will  of  the  society,  those  of  the  second  can  only  be  con- 
trolled by  subjecting  the  will  of  the  society  to  the  reason  of  the  society;  by  es- 
tablishing permanent  and  constitutional  maxims  of  conduct,  which  may  pre- 
vail over  occasional  impressions,  and  inconsiderate  pursuits. 

Here  our  republican  philosopher  might  have  proposed  as  a  model  to  law- 
givers, that  war  should  not  only  be  declared  by  the  authority  of  the  people, 
whose  toils  and  treasures  are  to  support  its  burdens,  instead  of  the  government 
which  is  to  reap  its  fruits ;  but  that  each  generation  should  be  made  to  bear 
the  burden  of  its  own  wars,  instead  of  carrying  them  on  at  the  expense  of 


472  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1792. 

other  generations.  And  to  give  the  fullest  energy  to  his  plan,  he  might  have 
added,  that  each  generation  should  not  only  bear  its  own  burdens,  but  that  the 
taxes  composing  them  should  include  a  due  proportion  of  such  ns  by  their 
direct  operation  keep  the  people  awake,  along  with  those  which,  being  wrapped 
up  in  other  payments,  may  leave  them  asleep,  to  misapplications  of  their 
money. 

To  the  objection,  if  started,  that  where  the  benefits  of  war  descend  to  suc- 
ceeding generations,  the  burdens  ought  also  to  descend,  he  might  have  an- 
swered, that  the  exceptions  could  not  be  easily  made;  that,  if  attempted,  they 
must  be  made  by  one  only  of  the  parties  interested;  that  in  the  alternative  of 
sacrificing  exceptions  to  general  rules,  or  of  converting  exceptions  into  general 
rules,  the  former  is  the  lesser  evil;  that  the  expense  of  necessary  wars  will 
never  exceed  the  resources  of  an  entire  generation  ;  that,  in  fine,  the  objection 
vanishes  before  the  fact,  that  in  every  nation  which  has  drawn  on  posterity 
for  the  support  of  its  wars,  the  accumulated  interest  of  its  perpetual  debts  has 
soon  become  more  than  a  sufficient  principal  for  all  its  exigencies. 

Were  a  nation  to  impose  such  restraints  on  itself,  avarice  would  be  sure  to 
calculate  the  expenses  of  ambition;  in  the  equipoise  of  these  passions,  reason 
would  be  free  to  decide  for  the  public  good,  and  an  ample  reward  would  ac- 
crue to  the  State — first,  from  the  avoidance  of  all  its  wars  of  folly  ;  secondly, 
from  the  vigor  of  its  unwasted  resources  for  wars  of  necessity  and  defence. 
Were  all  nations  to  follow  the  example,  the  reward  would  be  doubled  to  each, 
and  the  temple  of  Janus  might  be  shut,  never  to  be  opened  more. 

Had  Rousseau  lived  to  see  the  rapid  progress  of  reason  and  reformation, 
which  the  present  day  exhibits,  the  philanthropy  which  dictated  his  project 
would  find  a  rich  enjoyment  in  the  scene  before  him;  and  after  tracing  the 
past  frequency  of  wars  to  a  will  in  the  government  independent  of  the  will  of 
the  people,  to  the  practice  by  each  generation  of  taxing  the  principal  of  its 
debts  on  futui-e  generations,  and  to  the  facility  with  which  each  generation  is 
seduced  into  assumptions  of  the  interest,  by  the  deceptive  species  of  taxes 
which  pay  it,  he  would  contemplate  in  a  reform  of  every  government  subject- 
ing its  will  to  that  of  the  people,  in  a  subjection  of  each  generation  to  the 
payment  of  its  own  debts,  and  in  a  substitution  of  a  more  palpable,  in  place 
of  an  imperceptible  mode  of  paying  them,  the  only  hope  of  universal  axp 

PERPETUAL  PEACE. 

Philadelphia,  January  31st,  1792. 


10.  Government  of  the  United  States. 

Power  being  found  by  universal  experience  liable  to  abuses,  a  distribution 
of  it  into  separate  departments  has  become  a  first  principle  of  free  govern- 


1792.  GOVERNMENT    OF    THE    U.    S.  473 

merits.  By  this  contrivance,  the  portion  entrusted  to  the  same  hands  being 
less,  there  is  less  room  to  abuse  what  is  granted  ;  and  the  different  hands  being 
interested,  each  in  maintaining  its  own,  there  is  less  opportunity  to  usurp  what 
is  not  granted.  Hence  the  merited  praise  of  governments  modeled  on  a  par- 
tition of  their  powers  into  legislative,  executive,  and  judiciary,  and  a  repartition 
of  the  legislative  into  different  houses. 

The  political  system  of  the  United  States  claims  still  higher  praise.  The 
power  delegated  by  the  people  is  first  divided  between  the  General  Govern- 
ment and  the  State  governments,  each  of  which  is  then  subdivided  into  legis- 
lative, executive,  and  judiciary  departments.  And  as  in  a  single  government 
these  departments  are  to  be  kept  separate  and  safe  by  a  defensive  armour  for 
each,  so,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  do  the  two  governments  possess  each  the  means  of 
preventing  or  correcting  unconstitutional  encroachments  of  the  other.  Should 
this  improvement  in  the  theory  of  free  government  not  be  marred  in  the  exe- 
cution, it  may  prove  the  best  legacy  ever  left  by  lawgivers  to  their  country,  and 
the  best  lesson  ever  given  to  the  world  by  its  benefactors.  If  a  security  against 
power  lies  in  the  divisiou  of  it  into  parts  mutually  controlling  each  other,  the 
security  must  increase  with  the  increase  of  the  parts  into  which  the  whole  can 
be  conveniently  formed. 

It  must  not  be  denied  that  the  task  of  forming  and  maintaining  a  division 
of  power  between  different  governments  is  greater  than  among  different  de- 
partments of  the  same  government,  because  it  may  be  more  easy  (though  suffi- 
ciently difficult)  to  separate  by  proper  definitions  the  legislative,  executive,  and 
judiciary  powers,  which  are  more  distinct  in  their  nature,  than  to  discriminate, 
by  precise  enumerations,  one  class  of  legislative  powers  from  another  class, 
one  class  of  executive  from  another  class,  and  one  class  of  judiciary  from  an- 
other class,  where,  the  powers  being  of  a  more  kindred  nature,  their  boundaries 
are  more  obscure  and  run  more  into  each  other. 

If  the  task  be  difficult,  however,  it  must  by  no  means  be  abandoned.  Those 
who  would  pronounce  it  impossible,  offer  no  alternative  to  their  country  but 
schism  or  consolidation;  both  of  them  bad,  but  the  latter  the  worst,  since  it  is 
the  high  road  to  monarchy,  than  which  nothing  worse,  in  the  eye  of  Republi- 
cans, could  result  from  the  anarchy  implied  in  the  former. 

Those  who  love  their  country,  its  repose,  and  its  republicanism,  will  there- 
fore study  to  avoid  the  alternative  by  elucidating  and  guarding  the  limits  which 
define  the  two  governments,  by  inculcating  moderation  in  the  exercise  of  the 
powers  of  both,  and  particularly  a  mutual  abstinence  from  such  as  might  nurse 
present  jealousies  or  engender  greater. 

In  bestowing  the  eulogies  due  to  the  partitions  and  internal  checks  of  power, 
It  ought  not  the  less  to  be  remembered,  that  they  are  neither  the  sole  nor  the 
chief  palladium  of  constitutional  liberty.  The  people,  who  are  the  authors  of 
this  blessing,  must  also  be  its  guardians.     Their  eyes  must  be  ever  ready  to 


474  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1792. 

mark,  their  voice  to  pronounce,  and  their  arm  to  repel  or  repair,  aggressions 
on  the  authority  of  their  constitutions,  the  highest  authority  next  to  their  own, 
because  the  iniraediate  work  of  their  own,  and  the  most  sacred  part  of  their 
property,  as  recognising  and  recording  the  title  to  every  other. 
February  4th. 


11.  Spirit  of  Governments. 

No  government  is  perhaps  reducible  to  a  sole  principle  of  operation.  Where 
the  theory  approaches  nearest  to  this  character,  different  and  often  hetero- 
geneous principles  mingle  their  influence  in  the  administration.  It  is  useful, 
nevertheless,  to  analyze  the  several  kinds  of  government,  and  to  characterize 
them  by  the  spirit  which  predominates  in  each. 

Montesquieu  has  resolved  the  great  operative  principles  of  government  into 
fear,  honor,  and  virtue,  applying  the  first  to  pure  despotisms,  the  second  to 
regular  monarchies,  and  the  third  to  republics.  The  portion  of  truth  blended 
with  the  ingenuity  of  this  system  sufficiently  justifies  the  admiration  bestowed 
on  its  author.  Its  accuracy,  however,  can  never  be  defended  against  the  criti- 
cisms which  it  has  encountered.  Montesquieu  was  in  politics  not  a  Newton 
or  a  Locke,  who  established  immortal  systems — the  one  in  matter,  the  other  in 
mind.  He  was  in  his  particular  science  what  Bacon  was  in  universal  science. 
He  lifted  the  veil  from  the  venerable  errors  which  enslaved  opinion,  and  pointed 
the  way  to  those  luminous  truths  of  which  he  had  but  a  glimpse  himself. 

May  not  governments  be  properly  divided,  according  to  their  predominant 
spirit  and  principles,  into  three  species,  of  which  the  following  are  examples: 

First.  A  government  operating  by  a  permanent  military  force,  which  at 
once  maintains  the  government  and  is  maintained  by  it ;  which  is  at  once  the 
cause  of  burdens  on  the  people,  and  of  submission  in  the  people  to  their  bur- 
dens. Such  have  been  the  governments  under  which  human  nature  has 
groaned  through  every  age.  Such  are  the  governments  which  still  oppress  it 
in  almost  every  country  of  Europe,  the  quarter  of  the  globe  which  calls  itself 
the  pattern  of  civilization  and  the  pride  of  humanity. 

Secondly.  A  government  operating  by  corrupt  influence,  substituting  the 
motive  of  private  interest  in  place  of  public  duty,  converting  its  pecuniary  dis- 
pensations into  bounties  to  favorites  or  bribes  to  opponents,  accommodating 
its  measures  to  the  avidity  of  a  part  of  the  nation  instead  of  the  benefit  of  the 
whole ;  in  a  word,  enlisting  an  army  of  interested  partisans,  whose  tongues, 
whose  pens,  whose  intrigues,  and  whose  active  combinations,  by  supplying  the 
terror  of  the  sword,  may  support  a  real  domination  of  the  few,  under  an  ap- 
parent liberty  of  the  many.  Such  a  government,  wherever  to  be  found,  is  an 
impostor.     It  is  happy  for  the  New  World  that  it  is  not  on  the  west  side  of  the 


1792.  DISTRIBUTION    OF    CITIZENS.  475 

Atlantic.  It  will  bo  both  happy  and  honorable  for  the  United  States  if  they 
never  descend  to  mimic  the  costly  pageantry  of  its  form,  nor  betray  them- 
selves into  the  venal  spirit  of  its  administration. 

Thirdly.  A  government  deriving  its  energy  from  the  will  of  the  society, 
and  operating,  by  the  reason  of  its  measures,  on  the  understanding  and  interest 
of  the  society.  Such  is  the  government  for  which  philosophy  has  been  search- 
ing and  humanity  been  fighting  from  the  most  remote  ages.  Such  are  the 
republican  governments  which  it  is  the  glory  of  America  to  have  invented,  and 
her  unrivalled  happiness  to  possess.  May  her  glory  be  completed  by  every 
improvement  on  the  theory  which  experience  may  teach,  and  her  happiness 
be  perpetuated  by  a  system  of  administration  corresponding  with  the  purity 
of  the  theory. 

February  18th,  1792. 

12.  Republican  Distribution  of  Citizens. 

A  perfect  theory  on  this  subject  would  be  useful,  not  because  it  could  be  re- 
duced to  practice  by  any  plan  of  legislation,  or  ought  to  be  attempted  by  vio- 
lence on  the  will  or  property  of  individuals  ;  but  because  it  would  be  a  moni- 
tion against  empirical  experiments  by  power,  and  a  model  to  which  the  free 
choice  of  occupations  by  the  people  might  gradually  approximate  the  order 
of  society. 

The  best  distribution  is  that  which  would  most  favor  health,  virtue,  intelli- 
gence, and  competency  in  the  greatest  number  of  citizens.  It  is  needless  to  add 
to  these  objects  liberty  and  safety.  The  first  is  presupposed  by  them.  The 
last  must  result  from  them. 

The  life  of  the  husbandman  is  pre-eminently  suited  to  the  comfort  and  hap- 
piness of  the  individual.  Health,  the  first  of  blessings,  is  an  appertenance  of 
his  property  and  his  employment.  Virtue,  the  health  of  the  soul,  is  another 
part  of  his  patrimony,  and  no  less  favored  by  his  situation.  Intelligence  may 
be  cultivated  in  this  as  well  as  in  any  other  walk  of  life.  If  the  mind  be  less 
susceptible  of  polish  in  retirement  than  in  a  crowd,  it  is  more  capable  of  pro- 
found and  comprehensive  efforts.  Is  it  more  ignorant  of  some  things  ?  It  has 
a  compensation  in  its  ignorance  of  others.  Competency  is  more  universally 
the  lot  of  those  who  dwell  in  the  country  where  liberty  is  at  the  same  time 
their  lot.  The  extremes,  both  of  want  and  of  waste,  have  other  abodes.  'Tis 
not  the  country  that  peoples  either  the  Bridewells  or  the  Bedlams.  These 
mansions  of  wretchedness  are  tenanted  from  the  distresses  and  vices  of  over- 
grown cities. 

The  condition  to  which  the  blessings  of  life  are  most  denied  is  that  of  the 
sailor.  His  health  is  continually  assailed  and  his  span  shortened  by  the  stormy 
element  to  which  he  belongs.  His  virtue,  at  no  time  aided,  is  occasionally  ex- 
posed to  every  scene  that  can  poison  it.     His  mind,  like  his  body,  is  impris- 


476  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1792. 

oned  within  the  bark  that  transports  him.  Though  traversing  and  circumnav- 
igating the  globe,  he  sees  nothing  but  the  same  vague  objects  of  nature;  the 
same  monotonous  occurrences  in  ports  and  docks;  and  at  home  in  his  vessel 
what  new  ideas  can  shoot  from  the  unvaried  use  of  the  ropes  and  the  rudder, 
or  from  the  society  of  comrades  as  ignorant  as  himself?  In  the  supply  of  his 
wants  he  often  feels  a  scarcity,  seldom  more  than  a  bare  sustenance  ;  and  if 
his  ultimate  prospects  do  not  embitter  the  present  moment,  it  is  because  he 
never  looks  beyond  it.  How  unfortunate,  that  in  the  intercourse  by  which 
nations  are  enlightened  and  refined,  and  their  means  of  safety  extended,  the 
immediate  agents  should  be  distinguished  by  the  hardest  condition  of 
humanity. 

The  great  interval  between  the  two  extremes  is,  with  a  few  exceptions,  filled 
by  those  who  work  the  materials  furnished  by  the  earth  in  its  natural  and  cul- 
tivated state. 

It  is  fortunate,  in  general,  and  particularly  for  this  country,  that  so  much 
of  the  ordinary  and  most  essential  consumption  takes  place  in  fabrics  which 
can  be  prepared  in  every  family,  and  which  constitute,  indeed,  the  natural  ally 
of  agriculture.  The  former  is  the  work  within  doors,  as  the  latter  is  without ; 
and  each  being  done  by  hands  or  at  times  that  can  be  spared  from  the  other, 
the  most  is  made  of  everything. 

The  class  of  citizens  who  provide  at  once  their  own  food  and  their  own  rai- 
ment, may  be  viewed  as  the  most  truly  independent  and  happy.  They  are 
more;  they  are  the  best  basis  of  public  liberty  and  the  strongest  bulwark  of 
public  safety.  It  follows,  that  the  greater  the  proportion  of  this  class  to  the 
whole  society,  the  more  free,  the  more  independent,  and  the  more  happy  must 
be  the  society  itself. 

In  appreciating  the  regular  branches  of  manufacturing  and  mechanical  in- 
dustry, their  tendency  must  be  compared  with  the  principles  laid  down,  and 
their  merit  graduated  accordingly.  Whatever  is  least  favorable  to  vigor  of 
body,  to  the  faculties  of  the  mind,  or  to  the  virtues  or  to  the  utilities  of  life, 
instead  of  being  forced  or  fostered  by  public  authority,  ought  to  be  seen  with 
regret,  as  long  as  occupations  more  friendly  to  human  happiness  lie  vacant. 

The  several  professions  of  more  elevated  pretensions,  the  merchant,  the 
lawyer,  the  physician,  the  philosopher,  the  divine,  form  a  certain  proportion 
of  every  civilized  society,  and  readily  adjust  their  numbers  to  its  demands  and 
its  circumstances. 

March  3. 


13.  Fashion. 

An  humble  address  has  been  lately  presented  to  the  Prince  of  Wales  by  the 
Buckle  Manufacturers  of  Birmingham,  WassaJL,  Wolverhampton,  and  their 
environs,  stating  that  the  Buckle  Trade  gives  employment  to  more  than 


1702.  FASHION.  477 

twextt  THOUSAND  persons,  numbers  of  whom,  in  consequence  of  the  prevail- 
ing fashion  of  shoestrings  and  slippers,  are  at  present  without  employ,  al- 
most destitute  of  bread,  and  exposed  to  the  horrors  of  want  at  the  most  in 
clement  season;  that  to  the  manufacturers  of  Buckles  and  Buttons  Bir- 
mingham owes  its  important  figure  on  the  map  of  England  ;  that  it  is  to  no 
purpose  to  address  Fashion  herself,  she  being  void  of  feeling  and  deaf  to  ar- 
gument, but  fortunately  accustomed  to  listen  to  his  voice,  and  to  obey  his  com- 
mands; and,  finally,  imploring  his  Royal  Highness  to  consider  tbe  deplora- 
ble condition  of  their  trade,  which  is  in  danger  of  being  ruined  by  the  muta- 
bility of  fashion,  and  to  give  that  direction  to  the  public  taste  which  will  in- 
sure the  lasting  gratitude  of  the  petitioners. 

Several  important  reflections  are  suggested  by  this  address.    . 

I.  The  most  precarious  of  all  occupations  which  give  bread  to  the  indus- 
trious are  those  depending  on  mere  fashion,  which  generally  changes  so  sud- 
denly, and  often  so  considerably,  as  to  throw  whole  bodies  of  people  out  of  em- 
ployment. 

II.  Of  all  occupations  those  are  the  least  desirable  in  a  free  State  which 
produce  the  most  servile  dependence  of  one  class  of  citizens  on  another  class. 
This  dependence  must  increase  as  the  mutuality  of  wants  is  diminished. 
Where  the  wants  on  one  side  are  the  absolute  necessaries,  and  on  the  other 
are  neither  absolute  necessaries,  nor  result  from  the  habitual  economy  of  life, 
but  are  the  mere  caprices  of  fancy,  the  evil  is  in  its  extreme  ;  or  if  nol — 

III.  The  extremity  of  the  evil  must  be  in  the  case  before  us,  where  the  ab- 
solute necessaries  depend  on  the  caprices  of  fancy,  and  the  caprice  of  a  single 
fancy  directs  the  fashion  of  the  community.  Here  the  dependence  sinks  to 
the  lowest  point  of  servility.  We  see  a  proof  of  it  in  the  spirit  of  the  address. 
Twenty  thousand  persons  are  to  get  or. go  without  their  bread,  as  a  wanton 
youth  may  fancy  to  wear  his  shoes  with  or  without  straps,  or  to  fasten  his 
straps  with  strings  or  with  buckles.  Can  any  despotism  be  more  cruel  than 
a  situation  in  which  the  existence  of  thousands  depends  on  one  will,  and  that 
will  on  the  most  slight  and  fickle  of  all  motives,  a  mere  whim  of  the  imagina- 
tion ? 

IV.  What  a  contrast  is  here  to  the  independent  situation  and  manly  senti- 
ments of  American  citizens,  who  live  on  their  own  soil,  or  whose  labour  is 
necessary  to  its  cultivation,  or  who  are  occupied  in  supplying  wants  which, 
being  founded  in  solid  utility,  in  comfortable  accommodation,  or  in  settled 
habits,  produce  a  reciprocity  of  dependence,  at  once  insuring  subsistence,  and 
inspiring  a  dignified  sense  of  social  rights! 

V.  The  condition  of  those  who  receive  employment  and  bread  from  the 
precarious  source  of  fashion  and  superfluity,  is  a  lesson  to  nations  as  well  as  to 
individuals.  In  proportion  as  a  nation  consists  of  that  description  of  citizens, 
and  depends  on  external  commerce,  it  is  dependent  on  the  consumption  and 
caprice  of  other  nations.     If  the  laws  of  propriety  did  not  forbid,  the  manu- 


478  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1792. 

facturers  of  Birmingham,  Wassal,  and  Wolverhampton  had  as  real  an  inter- 
est in  supplicating  the  arbiters  of  fashion  in  America  as  the  patron  they  have 
addressed.  The  dependence  in  the  case  of  nations  is  even  greater  than  among 
individuals  of  the  same  nation  ;  for,  besides  the  mutability  of  fashion^  which 
is  the  same  in  both,  the  mutability  of  policy  is  another  source  of  danger  in 
the  former. 
March  20th. 


14.  Property. 

This  term,  in  its  particular  application,  means  "that  dominion  which  one 
man  claims  and  exercises  over  the  external  things  of  the  world,  in  exclusion 
of  every  other  individual." 

In  its  larger  and  juster  meaning,  it  embraces  everything  to  which  a  man 
may  attach  a  value  and  have  a  right,  and  which  leaves  to  every  one  else  the 
like  advantage. 

In  the  former  sense,  a  man's  land,  or  merchandise,  or  money,  is  called  his 
property. 

In  the  latter  sense,  a  man  has  a  property  in  his  opinions  and  the  free  com- 
munication of  them. 

He  has  a  property  of  peculiar  value  in  his  religious  opinions,  and  in  the 
profession  and  practice  dictated  by  them. 

He  has  a  property  very  dear  to  him  in  the  safety  and  liberty  of  his  person. 

He  has  an  equal  property  in  the  free  use  of  his  faculties,  and  free  choice  of 
the  objects  on  which  to  employ  them. 

In  a  word,  as  a  man  is  said  to  have  a  right  to  his  property,  he  may  be 
equally  said  to  have  a  property  in  his  rights. 

Where  an  excess  of  power  prevails,  property  of  no  sort  is  duly  respected. 
No  man  is  safe  in  his  opinions,  his  person,  his  faculties,  or  his  possessions. 

Where  there  is  an  excess  of  liberty,  the  effect  is  the  same,  though  from  an 
opposite  cause. 

Government  is  instituted  to  protect  property  of  every  sort;  as  well  that 
which  lies  in  the  various  rights  of  individuals,  as  that  which  the  term  particu- 
larly expresses.  This  being  the  end  of  government,  that  alone  is  a  just  gov- 
ernment which  impartially  secures  to  every  man  whatever  is  his  ovm. 

According  to  this  standard  of  merit,  the  praise  of  affording  a  just  securitv 
to  property  should  be  sparingly  bestowed  on  a  government  which,  however 
scrupulously  guarding  the  possessions  of  individuals,  does  not  protect  them  in 
the  enjoyment  and  communication  of  their  opinions,  in  which  tiny  have  an 
equal,  and,  in  the  estimation  of  some,  a  more  valuable  property. 

More  sparingly  should  this  praise  be  allowed  to  a  government  where  a  man's 
religious  rights  are  violated  by  penalties,  or  fettered  by  tests,  or  taxed  bs  a 
hierarchy. 


1792.  PROPERTY.  479 

Conscience  is  the  most  sacred  of  all  property;  other  property  depending 
in  part  on  positive  law,  the  exercise  of  that  being  a  natural  and  unalienable 
right.  To  guard  a  man's  house  as  his  castle,  to  pay  public  and  enforce  private 
debts  with  the  most  exact  faith,  can  give  no  title  to  invade  a  man's  conscience, 
which  is  more  sacred  than  his  castle,  or  to  withhold  from  it  that  debt  of  pro- 
tection for  which  the  public  faith  is  pledged  by  the  very  nature  and  original 
conditions  of  the  social  pact. 

That  is  not  a  just  government,  nor  is  property  secure  under  it,  where  the 
property  which  a  man  has  in  his  personal  safety  and  personal  liberty  is  vio- 
lated by  arbitrary  seizures  of  one  class  of  citizens  for  the  service  of  the  rest. 
A  magistrate  issuing  his  warrants  to  a  press-gang  would  be  in  his  proper 
functions  in  Turkey  or  Indostan,  under  appellations  proverbial  of  the  most 
complete  despotism. 

That  is  not  a  just  government,  nor  is  property  secure  under  it,  where  arbi- 
trary restrictions,  exemptions,  and  monopolies  deny  to  part  of  its  citizens  that 
free  use  of  their  faculties  and  free  choice  of  their  occupations  which  not  only 
constitute  their  property  in  the  general  sense  of  the  word,  but  are  the  means  of 
acquiring  property  strictly  so  called. 

What  must  be  the  spirit  of  legislation  where  a  manufacturer  of  linen  cloth 
is  forbidden  to  bury  his  own  child  in  a  linen  shroud,  in  order  to  favour  his 
neighbour  who  manufactures  woolen  cloth ;  where  the  manufacturer  and 
weaver  of  woolen  cloth  are  again  forbidden  the  economical  use  of  buttons  of 
that  material,  in  favor  of  the  manufacturer  of  buttons  of  other  materials  I 

A  just  security  to  property  is  not  afforded  by  that  government,  under  which 
unequal  taxes  oppress  one  species  of  property  and  reward  another  species ; 
where  arbitrary  taxes  iuvade  the  domestic  sanctuaries  of  the  rich,  and  excess- 
ive taxes  grind  the  faces  of  the  poor;  where  the  keenness  and  competitions  of 
want  are  deemed  an  insufficient  spur  to  labor,  and  taxes  are  again  applied  by 
an  unfeeling  policy,  as  another  spur,  in  violation  of  that  sacred  property  which 
Heaven,  in  decreeing  man  to  earn  his  bread  by  the  sweat  of  his  brow,  kindly 
reserved  to  him  in  the  small  repose  that  could  be  spared  from  the  supply  of 
his  necessities. 

If  there  be  a  government,  then,  which  prides  itself  in  maintaining  the  invio- 
lability of  property;  which  provides  that  none  shall  be  taken  directly,  even  for 
public  use,  without  indemnification  to  the  owner,  and  yet  directly  violates  the 
property  which  individuals  have  in  their  opinions,  their  religion,  their  passions, 
and  their  faculties — nay,  more,  which  indirectly  violates  their  property  in  their 
actual  possessions,  in  the  labor  that  acquires  their  daily  subsistence,  and  in 
the  hallowed  remnant  of  time  which  ought  to  relieve  their  fatigues  and  soothe 
their  cares — the  inference  will  have  been  anticipated  that  such  a  government 
is  not  a  pattern  for  the  United  States. 

If  the  United  States  mean  to  obtain  or  deserve  the  full  praise  due  to  wise 
and  just  governments,  they  will  equally  respect  the  rights  of  property  and  the 


480  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1Y92. 

property  in  rights;  they  will  rival  the  government  that  most  sacredly  guards 
the  former,  and  by  repelling  its  exam  pie  in  violating  the  latter,  will  make 
themselves  a  pattern  to  that  and  all  other  governments. 
March  27th. 


15.  The  Union — Who  are  its  Real  Friends? 

Not  those  who  charge  others  with  not  being  its  friends,  whilst  their  own 
conduct  is  wantonly  multiplying  its  enemies. 

Not  those  who  favor  measures  which,  by  pampering  the  spirit  of  speculation 
within  and  without  the  Government,  disgust  the  best  friends  of  the  Union. 

Not  those  who  promote  unnecessary  accumulations  of  the  debt  of  the  Union, 
instead  of  the  best  means  of  discharging  it  as  fast  as  possible,  thereby  increas- 
inf  the  causes  of  corruption  in  the  Government,  and  the  pretext  for  new  taxes 
under  its  authority ;  the  former  undermining  the  confidence,  the  latter  alien- 
ating the  affection,  of  the  people. 

Not  those  who  study,  by  arbitrary  interpretations  and  insidious  precedents, 
to  pervert  the  limited  Government  of  the  Union  into  a  government  of  unlim- 
ited discretion,  contrary  to  the  will  and  subversive  of  the  authority  of  the 
people. 

Not  those  who  avow  or  betray  principles  of  monarchy  and  aristocracy,  in 
opposition  to  the  republican  principles  of  the  Union  and  the  republican  spirit 
of  the  people,  or  who  espouse  a  system  of  measures  more  accommodated  to 
the  depraved  examples  of  those  hereditary  forms  than  to  the  true  genius  of  our 
own. 

Not  those,  in  a  word,  who  would  force  on  the  people  the  melancholy  duty 
of  choosing  between  the  loss  of  the  Union  and  the  loss  of  what  the  Union  was 
meant  to  secure. 

The  real  friends  of  the  Union  are  those  who  are  friends  to  the  authority 
of  the  people,  the  sole  foundation  on  which  the  Union  rests ; 

Who  are  friends  to  liberty,  the  great  end  for  which  the  Union  was  formed ; 

Who  are  friends  to  the  limited  and  republican  system  of  government,  the 
ra,eans  provided  by  that  authority  for  the  attainment  of  that  end; 

Who  are  enemies  to  every  public  measure  that  might  smooth  the  way  to 
hereditary  government,  for  resisting  the  tyrannies  of  which  the  Union  was  first 
planned,  and  for  more  effectually  excluding  which  it  was  put  into  its  present 
form ; 

Who,  considering  a  public  debt  as  injurious  to  the  interests  of  the  people 
and  baneful  to  the  virtue  of  the  Government,  are  enemies  to  every  contrivance 
for  unnecessarily  increasing  its  amount,  or  protracting  its  duration,  or  extend- 
ing its  influence. 

In  a  word,  those  are  the  real  friends  of  the  Union  who  are  friends  to  that 


1792.  A    CANDID    STATE    OF    PARTIES.  481 

republican  policy  throughout,  which  is  the  only  cement  for  the  union  of  a  re- 
publican people,  in  opposition  to  a  spirit  of  usurpation  and  monarchy,  which 
is  the  menstruum  most  capable  of  dissolving  it. 
March  31st. 


16.  A  Candid  State  of  Parties. 

As  it  is  the  business  of  the  contemplative  statesman  to  trace  the  history  of 
parties  in  a  free  country,  so  it  is  the  duty  of  the  citizen  at  all  times  to  under- 
stand the  actual  state  of  them.  Whenever  this  duty  is  omitted,  an  opportu- 
nity is  given  to  designing  men,  by  the  use  of  artificial  or  nominal  distinctions, 
to  oppose  and  balance  against  each  other  those  who  never  differed  as  to  the 
end  to  be  pursued,  and  may  no  longer  differ  as  to  the  means  of  attaining  it. 
The  most  interesting  state  of  parties  in  the  United  States  may  be  referred  to 
three  periods.  Those  who  espoused  the  cause  of  independence  and  those  who 
adhered  to  the  British  claims,  formed  the  parties  of  the  first  period  ;  if,  indeed, 
the  disaffected  class  were  considerable  euough  to  deserve  the  name  of  a  party. 
This  state  of  things  was  superseded  by  the  treaty  of  peace  in  1783.  From 
1783  to  1787  there  were  parties  in  abundance,  but  being  rather  local  than  gen- 
eral, they  are  not  within  the  present  review. 

The  Federal  Constitution,  proposed  in  the  latter  year,  gave  birth  to  a  sec- 
ond and  most  interesting  division  of  the  people.  Every  one  remembers  it, 
because  every  one  was  involved  in  it. 

Among  those  who  embraced  the  Constitution,  the  great  body  were  unques- 
tionably frieuds  to  republican  liberty;  though  there  were,  no  doubt,  some  who 
were  openly  or  secretly  attached  to  monarchy  and  aristocracy,  and  hoped  to 
make  the  Constitution  a  cradle  for  these  hereditary  establishments. 

Among  those  who  opposed  the  Constitution,  the  great  body  were  certainly 
well  affected  to  the  Union  and  to  good  government,  though  there  might  be  a 
few  who  had  a  leaning  unfavorably  to  both.  This  state  of  parties  was  termi- 
nated by  the  regular  and  effectual  establishment  of  the  Federal  Government 
in  1788,  out  of  the  administration  of  which,  however,  has  arisen  a  third  divis- 
ion, which,  being  natural  to  most  political  societies,  is  likely  to  be  of  some  du- 
ration in  ours. 

One  of  the  divisions  consists  of  those  who,  from  particular  interest,  from 
natural  temper,  or  from  the  habits  of  life,  are  more  partial  to  the  opulent  than 
to  the  other  classes  of  society ;  and  having  debauched  themselves  into  a  per- 
suasion that  mankind  are  incapable  of  governing  themselves,  it  follows  with 
them,  of  course,  that  government  can  be  carried  on  only  by  the  pageantry  of 
rank,  the  influence  of  money  and  emoluments,  and  the  tenor  of  military  force. 
Men  of  those  sentiments  must  naturally  wish  to  point  the  measures  of  Govern- 
ment less  to  the  interest  of  the  many  than  of  a  few,  and  less  to  the  reason  of 

VOL.  IV.  31 


482  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1792. 

the  many  than  to  their  weaknesses ;  hoping,  perhaps,  in  proportion  to  the 
ardor  of  their  zeal,  that  by  giving  such  a  turn  to  the  administration,  the  Gov- 
ernment itself  may  by  degrees  be  narrowed  into  fewer  hands,  and  approxi- 
mated to  an  hereditary  form.  The  other  division  consists  of  those  who.  believ- 
ing in  the  doctrine  that  mankind  are  capable  of  governing  themselves  and 
hating  hereditary  power  as  an  insult  to  the  reason  and  an  outrage  to  the  rights 
of  man,  are  naturally  offended  at  every  public  measure  that  does  not  appeal 
to  the  understanding  and  to  the  general  interest  of  the  community,  or  that 
is  not  strictly  conformable  to  the  principles  and  conducive  to  the  preservation 
of  republican  government. 

This  being  the  real  state  of  parties  among  us,  an  experienced  and  dispas- 
sionate observer  will  be  at  no  loss  to  decide  on  the  probable  conduct  of  each. 

The  anti-republican  party,  as  it  may  be  called,  being  the  weaker  in  point 
of  numbers,  will  be  induced  by  the  most  obvious  motives  to  strengthen  them- 
selves with  the  men  of  influence,  particularly  of  moneyed,  which  is  the  most 
active  and  insinuating  influence.  It  will  be  equally  their  true  policy  to  weaken 
their  opponents  by  reviving  exploded  parties,  and  taking  advantage  of  all 
prejudices,  local,  political,  and  occupational,  that  may  prevent  or  disturb  a 
general  coalition  of  sentiments. 

The  Republican  party,  as  it  may  be  termed,  conscious  that  the  mass  of  the 
people  in  every  part  of  the  Union,  in  every  State,  and  of  every  occupation, 
must  at  bottom  be  with  them,  both  in  interest  and  sentiment,  will  naturally 
find  their  account  in  burying  all  antecedent  questions,  in  banishing  every 
other  distinction  than  that  between  enemies  and  friends  to  republican  govern- 
ment, and  in  promoting  a  general  harmony  among  the  latter,  wherever  re- 
siding or  however  employed. 

Whether  the  republican  or  the  rival  party  will  ultimately  establish  its  as- 
cendence,  is  a  problem  which  may  be  contemplated  now,  but  which  time 
alone  can  solve.  On  one  hand,  experience  shows  that  in  politics,  as  in  war, 
stratagem  is  often  an  overmatch  for  numbers  ;  and,  among  more  happy  char- 
acteristics of  our  political  situation,  it  is  now  well  understood  that  there  are 
peculiarities,  some  temporary,  others  more  durable,  which  may  favour  that 
side  in  the  contest. 

On  the  republican  side,  again,  the  superiority  of  numbers  is  so  great,  their 
sentiments  are  so  decided,  and  the  practice  of  making  a  common  cause,  where 
there  is  a  common  sentiment  and  common  interest,  in  spite  of  circumstantial 
and  artificial  distinctions,  is  so  well  understood,  that  no  temperate  observer  of 
human  affairs  will  be  surprised  if  the  issue  in  the  present  instance  should  be 
reversed,  and  the  Government  be  administered  in  the  spirit  and  form  approved 
by  the  great  body  of  the  people. 

Philadelphia,  September  22. 


1792.  PUBLIC    LIBERTY.  483 


17.  Who  are  the  best  Keepers  of  the  People's  Liberties? 

Republican. — The  people  themselves.  The  sacred  trust  can  be  nowhere 
so  safe  as  in  the  hands  most  interested  in  preserving  it. 

Anti-Republican. — The  people  are  stupid,  suspicious,  licentious.  They  can- 
not safely  trust  themselves.  When  they  have  established  government  they 
should  think  of  nothing  but  obedience,  leaving  the  care  of  their  liberties  to 
their  wiser  rulers. 

Republican. — Although  all  men  are  born  free,  and  all  nations  might  be  so, 
yet,  too  true  it  is  that  slavery  has  been  the  general  lot  of  the  human  race. 
Ignorant,  they  have  been  cheated ;  aslaep,  they  have  been  surprised  ;  divided, 
the  yoke  has  been  forced  upon  them.  But  what  is  the  lesson?  that  because 
the  people  may  betray  themselves  they  ought  to  give  themselves  up,  blindfold, 
to  those  who  have  an  interest  in  betraying  them  ?  Rather  conclude  that  the 
people  ought  to  be  enlightened  to  be  awakened ;  to  be  united,  that  after  estab- 
lishing a  government  they  should  watch  over  it  as  well  as  obey  it. 

Anti-Republican. — You  look  at  the  surface  only,  where  errors  float,  instead 
of  fathoming  the  depths  where  truth  lies  hid.  It  is  not  the  government  that 
is  disposed  to  fly  off  from  the  people;  but  the  people  that  are  ever  ready  to 
fly  off  from  the  government.  Rather  say,  then,  enlighten  the  government,  warn 
it  to  be  vigilant,  enrich  it  with  influence,  arm  it  with  force,  and  to  the  people 
never  pronounce  but  two  words,  submission  and  confidence. 

Republican. — The  centrifugal  tendency,  then,  is  in  the  people,  not  in  the  gov- 
ernment, and  the  secret  art  lies  in  restraining  the  tendency  by  augmenting  the 
attractive  principle  of  the  government  with  all  the  weight  that  can  be  added  to 
it.  What  a  perversion  of  the  natural  order  of  things,  to  make  power  the  pri- 
mary and  central  object  of  the  social  system,  and  liberty  but  its  satellite! 

Anti- Republican. — The  science  of  the  stars  can  never  instruct  you  in  the 
mysteries  of  government.  Wonderful  as  it  may  seem,  the  more  you  increase 
the  attractive  force  of  power,  the  more  you  enlarge  the  sphere  of  liberty ;  the 
more  you  make  government  independent  and  hostile  towards  the  people,  the 
better  security  you  provide  for  their  rights  and  interests.  Hence  the  wisdom 
of  the  theory,  which,  after  limiting  the  share  of  the  people  to  a  third  of  the 
government,  and  lessening  the  influence  of  that  share  by  the  mode  and  term 
of  delegating  it,  establishes  two  grand  hereditaiy  orders,  with  feelings,  habits, 
interests,  and  prerogatives,  all  inveterately  hostile  to  the  rights  and  interests 
of  the  people,  yet,  by  a  mysterious  operation,  all  combining  to  fortify  the  people 
in  both. 

Republican. — Mysterious  indeed !  But  mysteries  belong  to  religion,  not  to 
government ;  to  the  ways  of  the  Almighty,  not  to  the  works  of  man.  And  in 
religion  itself  there  is  nothing  mysterious  to  its  author ;  the  mystery  lies  in  the 
dimness  of  the  human  sight.     So  in  the  institutions  of  man  let  there  be  no 


484  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1792. 

mystery,  unless  for  those  inferior  beings  endowed  with  a  ray,  perhaps,  of  the 
twilight  vouchsafed  to  the  first  order  of  terrestrial  creation. 

Anti- Republican. — You  are  destitute,  I  perceive,  of  every  quality  of  a  good 
citizen,  or,  rather,  of  a  good  subject.  You  have  neither  the  light  of  faith  nor 
the  spirit  of  obedience.  I  denounce  you  to  the  government  as  an  accomplice 
of  atheism  and  anarchy. 

Republican. — And  I  forbear  to  denounce  you  to  the  people,  though  a  blas- 
phemer of  their  rights  and  an  idolater  of  tyranny.  Liberty  disdains  to  per- 
secute. 

December  20. 


POLITICAL   OBSERVATIONS. 


A  variety  of  publications,  in  pamphlets  and  other  forms,  have  appeared  in 
different  parts  of  the  Union  since  the  session  of  Congress  which  ended  in  June, 
1794;  endeavoring,  by  discolored  representations  of  our  public  affairs,  and 
particularly  of  certain  occurrences  of  that  session,  to  turn  the  tide  of  public 
opinion  into  a  party  channel.  The  immediate  object  of  the  writers  was  either 
avowedly  or  evidently  to  operate  on  the  approaching  elections  of  Federal  Rep- 
resentatives. As  that  crisis  will  have  entirely  elapsed  before  the  following  ob- 
servations will  appear,  they  will,  at  least,  be  free  from  a  charge  of  the  same 
views  ;  and  will,  consequently,  have  the  stronger  claim  to  that  deliberate  atten- 
tion and  reflection  to  which  they  are  submitted. 

The  publications  alluded  to  have  passed  slightly  over  the  transactions  of  the 
First  and  Second  Congress ;  and  so  far,  their  example  will  here  be  followed. 

Whether,  indeed,  the  funding  system  was  modelled  either  on  the  principles 
of  substantial  justice  or  on  the  demands  of  public  faith?  Whether  it  did  not 
contain  ingredients  friendly  to  the  duration  of  the  public  debt,  and  implying 
that  it  was  regarded  as  a  public  good  ?  Whether  the  assumption  of  the  State 
debts  was  not  enforced  by  overcharged  representations ;  and  whether,  if  the 
burdens  had  been  equalized  only,  instead  of  being  assumed  in  the  gross,  the 
States  could  have  discharged  their  respective  proportions,  by  their  local  re- 
sources, sooner  and  more  conveniently  than  the  General  Government  will  be 
able  to  discharge  the  whole  debts  by  general  resources  ?  Whether  the  excise 
system  be  congenial  with  the  spirit  and  conducive  to  the  happiness  of  our 
country,  or  can  even  justify  itself  as  a  productive  source  of  revenue  ?  Whether 
again  the  Bank  was  not  established  without  authority  from  the  Constitution  ? 
Whether  it  did  not  throw  unnecessary  and  unreasonable  advantages  into  the 
hands  of  men,  previously  enriched  beyond  reason  or  necessity  ?*    And  whether 

*  According  to  the  plan  of  the  Bank,  originally  recommended  in  the  report  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  the  charter  was  to  continue  until  the  final  redemption  of  that  part  of  its  stock  con- 
sisting of  public  debt;  that  is,  until  the  whole  of  the  six  per  cent,  stock  should  be  redeemed;  for 
the  part  held  by  the  Bank  could  not  be  finally  redeemed  until  the  final  redemption  of  the  entire 
mass.  Iu  the  progress  of  the  bill  through  Congress,  the  term,  not  without  difficulty,  (as  it  ap- 
pears,) was  fixed  at  about  twenty  years.  Notwithstanding  this  reduction,  the  market  value  of 
Bank  stock  has  given  an  average  profit  to  the  subscribers  of  thirty  or  forty  per  cent,  on  their  cap- 
itals, or  an  aggregate  profit  of  three  on  the  aggregate  capital  of  eight  millions;  and  it  could  not 
otherwise  happen,  than  that  this  immense  gain  would  fall  into  the  hands  ot  those  who  had  gained 
most  by  purchases  or  certificates,  because  the  great  purchasers  being  most  on  the  watch,  having 
the  best  intelligence,  and,  in  general,  actually  attending  in  person,  or  by  agents,  on  the  operations 
of  the  Government,  would,  of  course,  be  the  first  to  seize  the  proffered  advantage,  in  exclusion  of 


486  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1793. 

it  can  be  allowed  the  praise  of  a  salutary  operation  until  its  effects  shall  have 
been  more  accurately  traced,  and  its  hidden  transactions  shall  be  fully  un- 
veiled to  the  public  eye?  These  and  others  are  questions  which,  though  of 
great  importance,  it  is  not  intended  here  to  examine.  Most  of  them  have  been 
finally  decided  by  the  competent  authority;  and  the  rest  have,  no  doubt,  al- 
ready impressed  themselves  on  the  public  attention. 

Passing  on  then  to  the  session  of  Congress  preceding  the  last,  we  are  met, 
in  the  first  place,  by  the  most  serious  charges  against  the  Southern  members 
of  Congress  in  general,  and  particularly  against  the  Representatives  of  Vir- 
ginia. They  are  charged  with  having  supported  a  policy  which  would  inevi- 
tably have  involved  the  United  States  in  the  war  of  Europe,  have  reduced  us 
from  the  rank  of  a  free  people  to  that  of  French  colonies,  and,  possibly,  have 
landed  us  in  disunion,  anarchy,  and  misery;  and  the  policy  from  which  these 
tremendous  calamities  was  to  flow,  is  referred  to  certain  commercial  resolu- 
tions moved  by  a  member  from  Virginia  in  the  House  of  Representatives. 

To  place  in  its  true  light  the  fallacy  which  infers  such  consequences  from 
such  a  cause,  it  will  be  proper  to  review  the  circumstances  which  preceded 
and  attended  the  resolution. 

It  is  well  known  that  at  the  peace  between  the  United  States  and  Great 
Britain,  it  became  a  question  with  the  latter,  whether  she  should  endeavor  to 
regain  the  lost  commerce  of  America  by  liberal  and  reciprocal  arrangements; 
or  trust  to  a  relapse  of  it  into  its  former  channels,  without  the  price  of  such  ar- 
rangements on  her  part.  Whilst  she  was  fearful  that  our  commerce  would  be 
conducted  into  new  and  rival  channels,  she  leaned  to  the  first  side  of  the  alter- 
native, and  a  bill  was  actually  carried  in  the  House  of  Commons,  by  the  pres- 
ent Prime  Minister*  corresponding  with  that  sentiment.     She  soon,  however, 

the  primitive,  the  distant,  and  the  uninformed,  if  not  misinformed,  holders  of  the  subscribable 
paper. 

It  has  actually  happened,  that  the  first  provision  for  redeeming  the  debt  at  the  stipulated  rate 
has  been  postponed  for  five  years  ;  and  the  provision  now  made,  if  no  interruption  whatever 
should  take  place,  will  not  effect  the  object  within  less  than  twenty-five  or  thirty  years.  It  will 
not  be  difficult  to  compute  the  additional  profit  which  would  have  accrued  to  the  stockholders  had 
the  original  plan  been  adopted.  But  there  is  another,  and,  perhaps, a  more  important  view  ot  the 
tendency  of  a  plan  making  the  duration  of  the  charter  to  depend  on  the  duration  of  the  public 
debt.  It  would  have  stimulated,  by  the  strongest  motive  of  interest,  that  important  and  influen- 
tial corporation  to  impede  the  final  discharge  of  the  public  debt,  in  order  to  prolong  its  charter  and 
its  emoluments.  At  present,  indeed,  it  has  but  too  obvious  a  temptation  to  favor  the  continuance 
and  increase  of  public  debts;  sinco  new  debts  call  for  anticipations  by  loans  of  its  paper,  and  pro- 
duce new  taxes,  by  which  the  circulation  of  its  paper  is  extended. 

Those  who  attend  to  this  subject,  with  minds  clouded  neither  by  prejudice  nor  by  interest,  will 
rightly  decide  on  the  union  which  has  subsisted  between  a  seat  in  Congress  and  a  seat  at  the  Kink. 
The  indecorum  as  well  as  evil  tendency  of  the  alliance  has,  by  provoking  the  censorial  notice  of 
the  public,  produced  a  temporary  dissolution  of  it.  Query,  whether  there  be  not  a  remnant  of  the 
abuse  in  the  case  of  such  as  are  at  the  same  time  stockholders  of  the  Rink  and  members  of  Con- 
gress? In  the  latter  character  they  voto  for  borrowing  money  on  public  account,  which,  in  their 
former  character,  they  are  to  lend  on  their  own  account. 

*  Mr.  Pitt. 


1795.  POLITICAL    OBSERVATIONS.  487 

began  to  discover  (or  to  hope)  that  the  weakness  of  our  Federal  Government, 
and  the  want  of  concurrence  among  the  State  governments,  would  secure  her 
against  the  danger  at  first  apprehended.  From  that  moment  all  ideas  of  con- 
ciliation and  concession  vanished.  She  determined  to  enjoy  at  once  the  full 
benefit  of  the  freedom  allowed  by  our  regulations,  and  of  the  monopolies  es- 
tablished by  her  own. 

In  this  state  of  things,  the  pride  as  well  as  the  interest  of  America  were 
everywhere  aroused.  The  mercantile  world,  in  particular,  was  all  on  fire ;  com- 
plaints flew  from  one  end  of  the  continent  to  the  other;  projects  of  retaliation 
and  redress  engrossed  the  public  attention.  At  one  time  the  States  endeavored, 
by  separate  efforts,  to  counteract  the  unequal  laws  of  Great  Britain.  At  an- 
other, correspondencies  were  opened  for  uniting  their  efforts.  An  attempt  was 
also  made  to  vest  in  the  former  Congress  a  limited  power  for  a  limited  time, 
in  order  to  give  effect  to  the  general  will. 

All  these  experiments,  instead  of  answering  the  purpose  in  view,  served  only 
to  confirm  Great  Britain  in  her  first  belief  that  her  restrictive  plans  were  in 
no  danger  of  retaliation. 

It  was  at  length  determined  by  the  Legislature  of  Virginia  to  go  to  work  in  a 
new  way.  It  was  proposed,  and  most  of  the  States  agreed,  to  send  commission- 
ers to  digest  some  change  in  our  general  system  that  might  prove  an  effectual 
remedy.  The  Commissioners  met;  but  finding  their  powers  too  circumscribed 
for  the  great  object,  which  expanded  itself  before  them,  they  proposed  a  Con- 
vention, on  a  more  enlarged  plan,  for  a  general  revision  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment. 

From  this  Convention  proceeded  the  present  Federal  Constitution,  which 
gives  to  the  general  will  the  means  of  providing  in  the  several  necessary  cases 
for  the  general  welfare ;  and  particularly  in  the  case  of  regulating  our  com- 
merce in  such  manner  as  may  be  required  by  the  regulations  of  other  coun- 
tries. 

It  was  natural  to  expect  that  one  of  the  first  objects  of  deliberation  under 
the  new  Constitution  would  be  that  which  had  been  first  and  most  contem- 
plated in  forming  it.  Accordingly  it  was,  at  the  first  session,  proposed  that 
something  should  be  done  analogous  to  the  wishes  of  the  several  States,  and 
expressive  of  the  efficiency  of  the  new  Government.  A  discrimination  between 
nations  in  treaty  and  those  not  in  treaty,  the  mode  most  generally  embraced 
by  the  States,  was  agreed  to  in  several  forms,  and  adhered  to  in  repeated  votes 
by  a  very  great  majority  of  the  House  of  Representatives.  The  Senate,  how- 
ever, did  not  concur  with  the  House  of  Representatives,  and  our  commercial 
arrangements  were  made  up  without  any  provision  on  the  subject. 

From  that  date  to  the  session  of  Congress  ending  in  June,  1794,  the  interval 
passed  without  any  effective  appeal  to  the  interest  of  Great  Britain.  A  silent 
reliance  was  placed  on  her  voluntary  justice  or  her  enlightened  interest. 

This  long  and  patient  reliance  being  ascribed  (as  was  foretold)  to  other 


483  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1795. 

onuses  than  a  generous  forbearance  on  the  part  of  the  United  States,  had,  at 
the  commencement  of  the  Third  Congress,  left  ns,  with  respect  to  a  reciprocity 
of  commercial  regulations  between  the  two  countries,  precisely  where  the  com- 
mencement  of  the  First  Congress  had  found  us.  This  was  not  all ;  the  western 
posts,  which  entailed  an  expensive  Indian  war  on  us,  continued  to  be  with- 
held, although  all  pretext  for  it  had  been  removed  on  our  part.  Depredations 
as  derogatory  to  our  rights  as  grievous  to  our  interests,  had  been  licensed  by 
the  British  Government  against  our  lawful  commerce  on  the  high  seas.  And 
it  was  believed,  on  the  most  probable  grounds,  that  the  measure  by  which  the 
Algerine  pirates  were  let  loose  on  the  Atlantic  had  not  taken  place  without 
the  participation  of  the  same  unfriendly  counsels.  In  a  word,  to  say  nothing 
of  the  American  victims  to  savages  and  barbarians,  it  was  estimated  that  our 
annual  damages  from  Great  Britain  were  not  less  than  three  or  four  millions 
of  dollars. 

This  distressing  situation  spoke  the  more  loudly  to  the  patriotism  of  the 
Representatives  of  the  people,  as  the  nature  and  manner  of  the  communica- 
tions from  the  President  seemed  to  make  a  formal  and  affecting  appeal  on  the 
subject  to  their  co-operation.  The  necessity  of  some  effort  was  palpable.  The 
only  room  for  different  opinions  seemed  to  lie  in  the  different  modes  of  redress 
proposed.  On  one  side  nothing  was  proposed  beyond  the  eventual  measures 
of  defence,  in  which  all  concurred,  except  the  building  of  six  frigates,  for  the 
purpose  of  enforcing  our  rights  against  Algiers.  The  other  side,  considering 
this  measure  as  pointed  at  one  only  of  our  evils,  and  as  inadequate  even  to 
that,  thought  it  best  to  seek  for  some  safe  but  powerful  remedy,  that  might  be 
applied  to  the  root  of  them  ;  and  with  this  view  the  commercial  propositions 
were  introduced. 

They  were  at  first  opposed,  on  the  ground  that  Groat  Britain  was  amicably 
disposed  towards  the  United  States,  and  that  we  ought  to  await  the  event  of 
the  depending  negotiation.  To  this  it  was  replied,  that  more  than  four  years 
of  appeal  to  that  disposition  had  been  tried  in  vain  by  the  new  Government; 
that  the  negotiation  had  been  abortive  and  was  no  longer  depending ;  that  the 
late  letters*  from  Mr.  Pinckney,  the  Minister  at  London,  had  not  only  cut  off 
all  remaining  hope  from  that  source,  but  had  expressly  pointed  commercial 
regulations  as  the  most  eligible  redress  to  be  pursued. 

Another  ground  of  opposition  was,  that  the  United  States  were  more  depend- 
ent on  the  trade  of  Great  Britain  than  Great  Britain  was  on  the  trade  of  the 
United  States.  This  will  appear  scarcely  credible  to  those  who  understand 
the  commerce  between  the  two  countries,  who  recollect  that  it  supplies  us  chiefly 
with  superfluities  ;  whilst  in  return  it  employs  the  industry  of  one  part  of  her 
people,  sends  to  another  part  the  very  bread  which  keeps  them  from  starving, 

*  See  his  letter  of  15th  August,  1793,  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  in  the  printed  communications 
from  the  President  to  the  Congress. 


1705.  POLITICAL    OBSERVATIONS.  489 

and  remits,  moreover,  an  annual  balance  in  specie  of  ten  or  twelve  millions 
of  dollars.*  It  is  true,  nevertheless,  as  the  debate  shews,  that  this  was  tho 
language,  however  strange,  of  some  who  combated  the  propositions. 

Nay,  what  is  still  more  extraordinary,  it  was  maintained  that  the  United 
States  had,  on  the  whole,  little  or  no  reason  to  complain  of  the  footing  of  their 
commerce  with  Great  Britain  ;  although  such  complaints  had  prevailed  in 
every  State,  among  every  class  of  citizens,  ever  since  the  year  1783  ;  and  al- 
though the  Federal  Constitution  had  originated  in  those  complaints,  and  had 
been  established  with  the  known  view  of  redressing  them. 

As  such  objections  could  have  little  effect  in  convincing  the  judgment  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  and  still  less  that  of  the  public  at  large,  a  new 
mode  of  assailing  the  propositions  has  been  substituted.  The  American  peo- 
ple love  peace ;  and  the  cry  of  war  might  alarm  when  no  hope  remained  of 
convincing  them.  The  cry  of  war  has  accordingly  been  echoed  through  the 
continent  with  a  loudness  proportioned  to  the  emptiness  of  the  pretext;  and 
to  this  cry  has  been  added  another  still  more  absurd,  that  the  propositions 
would,  in  the  end,  enslave  the  United  States  to  their  allies  and  plunge  them 
into  anarchy  and  misery. 

It  is  truly  mortifying  to  be  obliged  to  tax  the.  patience  of  the  reader  with  an 
examination  of  such  gross  absurdities ;  but  it  may  be  of  use  to  expose  where 
there  may  be  no  necessity  to  refute  them. 

What  were  the  commercial  propositions?  They  discriminated  between  na- 
tions in  treaty  and  nations  not  in  treaty,  by  an  additional  duty  on  the  manu- 
factures and  trade  of  the  latter ;  and  they  reciprocated  the  navigation  laws  of 
all  nations  who  excluded  the  vessels  of  the  United  States  from  a  common  right 
of  being  used  in  the  trade  between  the  United  States  and  such  nations. 

Is  there  anything  here  that  could  afford  a  cause  or  a  pretext  for  war  to  Great 
Britain  or  any  other  nation  ?  If  we  hold  at  present  the  rank  of  a  free  people ; 
if  we  are  no  longer  Colonies  of  Great  Britain  ;  if  we  have  not  already  relapsed 
into  some  dependence  on  that  nation,  we  have  the  self-evident  right  to  regulate 
our  trade  according  to  our  own  will  and  our  own  interest,  not  according  to  her 
will  or  her  interest.  This  right  can  be  denied  to  no  independent  nation.  It 
has  not  been  and  will  not  be  denied  to  ourselves,  by  any  opponent  of  the 
propositions. 

*  This  balance  is  not  precise,  but  cay  be  deemed  within  tho  amount.  It  appears  from  a  late, 
and  apparently  an  office  statement  from  Great  Britain  of  exports  and  imports  between  Great  Brit- 
ain and  the  United  States,  that  the  actual  balance  in  the  year  1701  was  three  millions  thirty-one 
thousand  two  hundred  and  fifteen  pounds  fourteen  and  ninepence  sterling,  and  in  the  year  1792  three 
millions  two  hundred  and  thirty-one  thousand  and  ninety  pounds  seven  shillings  andfourpence  sterl- 
ing, equal  to  fourteen  millions  three  hundred  and  sixty  thousand  four  hundred  and  one  d/illars.  As 
this  relates  to  the  trade  with  Great  Britain  only,  the  balance  in  our  favor  in  the  West  India  trade 
is  to  be  deducted.  There  is  reason,  however,  to  believe  that  it  would  not  reduce  the  general  bal- 
ance so  low  as  is  above  stated;  besides,  that  the  balance  against  us  in  the  trade  with  Ireland  is  not 
taken  into  the  account. 


490  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1795. 

If  the  propositions  could  give  no  right  to  Great  Britain  to  make  war,  would 
they  have  given  any  color  to  her  for  such  an  outrage  on  us?  No  American 
citizen  will  affirm  it.  No  British  subject,  who  is  a  man  of  candor,  will  pre- 
tend it ;  because,  he  must  know  that  the  commercial  regulations  of  Great 
Britain  herself  have  discriminated  among  foreign  nations  whenever  it  was 
thought  convenient.  They  have  discriminated  against  particular  nations  by 
name;  they  have  discriminated  with  respect  to  particular  articles  byname,  by 
the  nations  producing  them,  and  by  the  places  exporting  them.  And  as  to  the 
navigation  articles  proposed,  they  were  not  only  common  to  the  other  coun- 
tries along  with  Great  Britain,  but  reciprocal  between  Great  Britain  and  the 
United  Slates;  nay,  it  is  notorious  that  they  fell  short  of  an  immediate  and 
exact  reciprocity  of  her  own  navigation  laws. 

Would  any  nation  be  so  barefaced  as  to  quarrel  with  another  for  doing  the 
same  thing  which  she  herself  has  done,  for  doing  less  than  she  herself  has 
done,  towards  that  particular  nation  ?  It  is  impossible  that  Great  Britain  would 
ever  expose  herself  by  so  absurd  as  well  as  arrogant  a  proceeding.  If  she 
really  meant  to  quarrel  with  this  country,  common  prudence  and  common  de- 
cency would  prescribe  some  other  less  odious  pretext  for  her  hostility. 

It  is  the  more  astonishing  that  such  a  charge  against  the  propositions  should 
have  been  hazarded  when  the  opinion  and  the  proceedings  of  America  on  the 
subject  of  our  commercial  policy  is  reviewed. 

Whilst  the  power  over  trade  remained  with  the  several  States  there  were  few 
of  them  that  did  not  exercise  it,  on  the  principle,  if  not  in  the  mode,  of  the 
commercial  propositions.  The  Eastern  States,  generally,  passed  laws  either 
discriminating  between  some  foreign  nations  and  others,  or  levelled  against 
Great  Britain  by  name.  Maryland  and  Virginia  did  the  same;  so  did  two.  if 
not  the  three,  of  the  more  Southern  States.  Was  it  ever,  during  that  period, 
pretended  at  home  or  abroad,  that  a  cause  or  pretext  for  the  quarrel  was  given 
to  Great  Britain  or  any  other  nation  ?  or  were  our  rights  better  understood  at 
that  time  than  at  this,  or  more  likely  then  than  now  to  command  the  respect 
due  to  them  ? 

Let  it  not  be  said  Great  Britain  was  then  at  peace  ;  she  is  now  at  war.  If 
she  would  not  wantonly  attempt  to  control  the  exercise  of  our  sovereign  rights 
when  she  had  no  other  enemy  on  her  hands,  will  she  be  mad  euough  to  make 
the  attempt  when  her  hands  are  fully  employed  with  the  war  already  on  them? 
Would  not  those  who  say  now  postpone  the  measures  until  Great  Britain  shall 
be  at  peace  be  more  ready  and  have  more  reason  to  say,  in  time  of  peace,  post- 
pone them  until  she  shall  be  at  war;  there  will  then  be  no  danger  of  her  throw- 
ing new  enemies  into  the  scale  against  her? 

Nor  let  it  be  said  that  the  combined  Powers  would  aid  and  stimulate  Great 
Britain  to  wage  an  unjust  war  on  the  United  States.  They  also  are  too  fully 
occupied  with  their  present  enemy  to  wish  for  another  on  their  hands  ;  net  to 
add,  that  two  of  those  Powers,  being  in  treaty  with  the  United  States,  are 


1795.  POLITICAL    OBSERVATIONS.  491 

favored  by  the  propositions ;  and  that  all  of  them  are  well  known  to  entertain 
an  habitual  jealousy  of  the  monopolizing  character  and  maritime  ascendency 
of  that  nation. 

One  thing  ought  to  be  regarded  ascertain  and  conclusive  on  this  head: 
whilst  the  war  against  France  remains  unsuccessful  the  United  States  are  in 
no  danger  from  any  of  the  Powers  engaged  in  it.  In  the  event  of  a  complete 
overthrow  of  that  Republic,  it  is  impossible  to  say  what  might  follow.  But  if 
the  hostile  views  of  the  combination  should  be  turned  towards  this  coutinent, 
it  would  clearly  not  be  to  vindicate  the  commercial  interests  of  Great  Britain 
against  the  commercial  rights  of  the  United  States.  The  object  would  be,  to 
root  out  Liberty  from  the  face  of  the  earth.  No  pretext  would  be  wanted,  or 
a  better  would  be  contrived  than  anything  to  be  fouud  in  the  commercial 
propositions. 

On  whatever  other  side  we  view  the  clamor  against  these  propositions  as  in- 
evitably productive  of  war,  it  presents  neither  evidence  to  justify  it  nor  argu- 
ment to  colour  it. 

The  allegation  necessarily  supposes  either  that  the  friends  of  the  plan  could 
discover  no  probability,  where  its  opponents  could  see  a  certainty,  or  that  the 
former  were  less  averse  to  war  than  the  latter. 

The  first  supposition  will  not  be  discussed.  A  few  observations  on  the  other 
may  throw  new  lights  on  the  whole  subject. 

The  members,  in  general,  who  espoused  these  propositions  have  been  con- 
stantly in  that  part  of  the  Congress  who  have  professed  with  most  zeal,  and 
pursued  with  most  scruple,  the  characteristics  of  republican  government. 
They  have  adhered  to  these  characteristics  in  defining  the  meaning  of  the 
Constitution,  iu  adjusting  the  ceremonial  of  public  proceedings,  and  in  mark- 
ing out  the  course  of  the  Administration.  They  have  manifested,  particu- 
larly, a  deep  conviction  of  the  danger  to  liberty  and  the  Constitution,  from  a 
gradual  assumption  or  extension  of  discretionary  powers  in  the  executive 
department ;  from  successive  augmentations  of  a  standing  army  ;  and  from 
the  perpetuity  and  progression  of  public  debts  and  taxes.  They  have  been 
sometimes  reprehended  in  debate  for  an  excess  of  caution  and  jealousy  on 
these  points.  And  the  newspapers  of  a  certain  stamp,  by  distorting  and  dis- 
colouring this  part  of  their  conduct,  have  painted  it  in  all  the  deformity  which 
the  most  industrious  calumny  could  devise. 

Those  best  acquainted  with  the  individuals  who  more  particularly  supported 
the  propositions  will  be  foremost  to  testify,  that  such  are  the  principles  which 
not  only  govern  them  in  public  life,  but  which  are  invariably  maintained  by 
them  in  every  other  situation.  And  it  cannot  be  believed  nor  suspected,  that 
with  such  principles  they  could  view  war  as  less  an  evil  than  it  appeared  to 
iheir  opponents. 

Of  all  the  enemies  to  public  liberty  war  is,  perhaps,  the  most  to  be  dreaded, 


492  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1791 

because  it  comprises  and  develops  the  germ  of  every  other.  War  is  the 
parent  of  armies;  from  these  proceed  debts  and  taxes;  and  armies,  and  debts, 
and  taxes  are  the  known  instruments  for  bringing  the  many  under  the  dom- 
ination of  the  few.  In  war,  too,  the  discretionary  power  of  the  Executive  is 
extended;  its  influence  in  dealing  out  offices,  honors,  and  emoluments  is  multi- 
plied; and  all  the  means  of  seducing  the  minds,  are  added  to  those  of  subduing 
the  force,  of  the  people.  The  same  malignant  aspect  in  republicanism  may  be 
traced  in  the  inequality  of  fortunes,  and  the  opportunities  of  fraud,  growing 
out  of  a  state  of  war,  and  in  the  degeneracy  of  manners  and  of  morals,  en- 
gendered by  both.  No  nation  could  preserve  its  freedom  in  the  midst  of  con- 
tinual warfare. 

Those  truths  are  well  established.  They  ere  read  in  every  page  which 
records  the  progression  from  a  less  arbitrary  to  a  more  arbitrary  government, 
or  the  transition  from  a  popular  government  to  an  aristocracy'  or  a  mon- 
archy. 

It  must  be  evident,  then,  that  in  the  same  degree  as  the  friends  of  the  prop- 
ositions were  jealous  of  armies,  and  debts,  and  prerogative,  as  dangerous  to  a 
republican  Constitution,  they  must  have  been  averse  to  war,  as  favourable  to 
armies  and  debts,  and  prerogative. 

The  fact  accordingly  appears  to  be,  that  they  were  particularly  averse  to 
war.  They  not  only  considered  the  propositions  as  having  no  tendency  to  war, 
but  preferred  them,  as  the  most  likely  means  of  obtaining  our  objects  without 
war.  They  thought,  and  thought  truly,  that  Great  Britain  was  more  vulnera- 
ble in  her  commerce  than  in  her  fleets  and  armies  ;  that  she  valued  our  neces- 
saries for  her  markets,  and  our  markets  for  her  superfluities,  more  than  she 
feared  our  frigates  or  our  militia ;  and  that  she  would,  consequently,  be  more 
ready  to  make  proper  concessions  under  the  influence  of  the  former,  than  of 
the  latter  motive. 

Great  Britain  is  a  commercial  nation.  Her  power,  as  well  as  her  wealth, 
is  derived  from  commerce.  The  American  commerce  is  the  most  valuable 
branch  she  enjoys.  It  is  the  more  valuable,  not  only  as  being  of  vital  import- 
ance to  her  in  some  respects,  but  of  growing  importance  beyond  estimate  in 
its  general  character.  She  will  not  easily  part  with  such  a  resource.  She 
will  not  rashly  hazard  it.  She  would  be  particularly  aware  of  forcing  a  per- 
petuity of  regulations,  which  not  merely  diminish  her  share,  but  mav  favour 
the  rivalship  of  other  nations.  If  anything,  therefore,  in  the  power  of  the 
United  States  could  overcome  her  pride,  her  avidity,  and  her  repugnancy  to 
this  country,  it  was  justly  concluded  to  be,  not  the  fear  of  our  arms,  which, 
though  invincible  in  defence,  are  little  formidable  in  a  war  of  offence,  but  the 
fear  of  suffering  in  the  most  fruitful  branch  of  her  trade,  and  of  seeing  it  dis- 
tributed among  her  rivals. 

If  any  doubt  on  this  subject  could  exist,  it  would  vanish  on  a  recollection 


1795.  POLITICAL    OBSERVATIONS.  493 

of  the  couduct  of  the  British  ministry  at  the  close  of  the  war  in  1 783.  It  is  a 
fact  which  has  been  alread}'  touched,  and  is  as  notorious  as  it  is  instructive, 
that  during  the  apprehension  of  flndiug  her  commerce  with  the  United  States 
abridged  or  endangered  by  the  consequences  of  the  Revolution,  Great  Britain 
was  ready  to  purchase  it,  even  at  the  expense  of  her  West  Indies  monopoly. 
It  was  not  until  after  she  began  to  perceive  the  weakness  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, the  discord  in  the  counteracting  plans  of  the  State  governments,  and 
the  interest  she  would  be  able  to  establish  here,  that  she  ventured  on  that  sys- 
tem to  which  she  has  since  inflexibly  adhered.  Had  the  present  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, on  its  first  establishment,  done  what  it  ought  to  have  done,  what  it  was 
instituted  and  expected  to  do,  and  what  was  actually  proposed  and  intended  it 
should  do  ;  had  it  revived  and  confirmed  the  belief  in  Great  Britain  that  our 
trade  and  navigation  would  not  be  free  to  her  without  an  equal  and  reciprocal 
freedom  to  us  in  her  trade  and  navigation,  we  have  her  own  authority  for  say- 
ing that  she  would  long  since  have  met  us  on  proper  ground  ;  because  the 
same  motives  which  produced  the  bill  brought  into  the  British  Parliament  by- 
Mr.  Pitt,  in  order  to  prevent  the  evil  apprehended,  would  have  produced  the 
same  concession  at  least,  in  order  to  obtain  a  recall  of  the  evil,  after  it  had 
taken  place. 

The  aversion  to  war  in  the  friends  of  the  propositions  may  be  traced  through 
the  whole  proceedings  and  debates  of  the  session.  After  the  depredations  in 
the  West  Indies  which  seemed  to  fill  up  the  measure  of  British  aggressions, 
they  adhered  to  their  original  policy  of  pursuing  redress,  rather  by  commercial 
than  by  hostile  operations,  and  with  this  view  unanimously  concurred  in  the 
bill  for  suspending  importations  from  British  ports ;  a  bill  that  was  carried 
through  the  House  by  a  vote  of  fifty-eight  against  thirty-four.  The  friends  of 
the  propositions  appeared,  indeed,  never  to  have  admitted  that  Great  Britain 
could  seriously  mean  to  force  a  war  with  the  United  States,  unless  in  the  event 
of  prostrating  the  French  Republic,  and  they  did  not  believe  that  such  an  event 
was  to  be  apprehended. 

Confiding  in  this  opinion,  to  which  time  has  given  its  full  sanction,  they 
could  not  accede  to  those  extraordinary  measures,  which  nothing  short  of  the 
most  obvious  and  imperious  necessity  could  plead  for.  They  were  as  ready 
as  any  to  fortifyr  our  harbours,  and  fill  our  magazines  and  arsenals ;  these 
were  safe  and  requisite  provisions  for  our  permanent  defence.  They  were 
ready  and  anxious  for  arming  and  preparing  our  militia ;  that  was  the  true 
republican  bulwark  of  our  security.  They  joined  also  in  the  addition  of  a 
regiment  of  artillery  to  the  military  establishment,  in  order  to  complete  the 
defensive  arrangement  on  our  eastern  frontier.  These  facts  are  on  record, 
and  are  the  proper  answer  to  those  shameless  calumnies  which  have  asserted 
that  the  friends  of  the  commercial  propositions  were  enemies  to  every  proposi- 
tion for  the  national  security. 

But  it  was  their  opponents,  not  they,  who  continually  maintained  that  on  a 


494  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1795. 

failure  of  negotiation  it  would  be  more  eligible  to  seek  redress  by  war  than 
by  commercial  regulations  ;  who  talked  of  raising  armies  that  might  threaten 
the  neighbouring  possessions  of  foreign  powers  ;  who  contended  for  delegating 
to  the  Executive  the  prerogatives  of  deciding  whether  the  country  was  at  war 
or  not.  and  of  levying,  organizing,  and  calling  into  the  field  a  regular  army  of 
ten,  fifteen,  nay  of  twexty-fivk  thousand  men. 

It  is  of  some  importance  that  this  part  of  the  history  of  the  session,  which 
has  found  no  place  in  the  late  reviews  of  it,  should  be  well  understood.  They 
who  arc  curious  to  learn  the  particulars  must  examine  the  debates  and  the 
votes.  A  full  narrative  would  exceed  the  limits  which  are  here  prescribed. 
It  must  suffice  to  remark,  that  the  efforts  were  varied  and  repeated  uutil  the 
last  moment  of  the  session,  even  after  the  departure  of  a  number  of  members 
forbade  new  propositions,  much  more  a  renewal  of  rejected  ones ;  and  that 
the  powers  proposed  to  be  surrendered  to  the  Executive  were  those  which  the 
Constitution  has  most  jealously  appropriated  to  the  Legislature. 

The  reader  shall  judge  on  this  subject  for  himself. 

The  Constitution  expressly  and  exclusively  vests  in  the  Legislature  the 
power  of  declaring  a  state  of  war :  it  was  proposed  that  the  Executive  might, 
in  the  recess  of  the  Legislature,  declare  the  United  States  to  be  in  a  state  of 
war. 

The  Constitution  expressly  and  exclusively  vests  in  the  Legislature  the 
power  of  raising  armies  :  it  was  proposed  that,  in  the  recess  of  the  Legislature, 
the  Executive  might,  at  its  pleasure,  raise  or  not  raise  an  army  often,  fifteen, 
or  twenty-five  thousand  men. 

The  Constitution  expressly  and  exclusively  vests  in  the  Legislature  the 
power  of  creating  offices :  it  was  proposed  that  the  Executive,  in  the  recess  of 
the  Legislature,  might  create  offices  as  well  as  appoint  officers  for  an  army  of 
ten,  fifteen,  or  twenty-five  thousand  men. 

A  delegation  of  such  powers  would  have  struck,  not  only  at  the  fabric  of 
our  Constitution,  but  at  the  foundation  of  all  well  organized  and  well  checked 
governments. 

The  separation  of  the  power  of  declaring  war  from  that  of  conducting  it,  is 
wisely  contrived  to  exclude  the  danger  of  its  being  declared  for  the  sake  of  its 
being  conducted. 

The  separation  of  the  power  of  raising  armies  from  the  power  of  command- 
ing them,  is  inteuded  to  prevent  the  raising  of  armies  for  the  sake  of  com- 
manding them. 

The  separation  of  the  power  of  creating  offices  from  that  of  filling  them,  is 
an  essential  guard  against  the  temptation  to  create  offices  for  the  sake  of  grati. 
fying  favourites  or  multiplying  dependents. 

Where  would  be  the  difference  between  the  blending  of  these  incompatible 
powers,  by  surrendering  the  legislative  part  of  them  into  the  hands  of  the  Ex- 
ecutive, and  by  assuming  the  executive  part  of  them  into  the  hands  of  tho 


1795.  POLITICAL    OBSERVATIONS.  495 

Legislature?  In  either  case  the  principle  would  be  equally  destroyed,  and  the 
consequences  equally  dangerous. 

An  attempt  to  answer  these  observations  by  appealing  to  the  virtues  of  the 
present  Chief  Magistrate,  and  to  the  confidence  justly  placed  in  them,  will  be 
little  calculated  either  for  his  genuine  patriotism  or  for  the  sound  judgment 
of  the  American  public. 

The  people  of  the  United  States  would  not  merit  the  praise  universally  al- 
lowed to  their  intelligence  if  they  did  not  distinguish  between  the  respect  due 
to  the  man  and  the  functions  belonging  to  the  office.  In  expressing  the  for- 
mer, there  is  no  limit  or  guide,  but  the  feelings  of  their  grateful  hearts.  In 
deciding  the  latter,  they  will  consult  the  Constitution  ;  they  will  consider  human 
nature,  and,  looking  beyond  the  character  of  the  existing  Magistrate,  fix  their 
eve-  on  the  precedent  which  must  descend  to  his  successors. 

Will  it  be  more  than  truth  to  say,  that  this  great  and  venerable  name  is  too 
often  assumed  for  what  cannot  recommend  itself,  and  for  what  there  is  neither 
proof  nor  probability  that  its  sanction  can  be  claimed?  Do  arguments  fail? 
Is  the  public  mind  to  be  encountered?  There  are  not  a  few  ever  ready  to  in- 
voke the  name  of  Washington  ;  to  garnish  their  heretical  doctrines  with  his 
virtues,  and  season  their  unpalatable  measures  with  his  popularity.  Those 
who  take  this  liberty  will  not,  however,  be  mistaken ;  his  truest  friends  will  be 
the  last  to  sport  with  his  influence — above  all,  for  electioneering  purposes. 
And  it  is  but  a  fair  suspicion,  that  they  who  draw  most  largely  on  that  fund 
are  hastening  fastest  to  bankruptcy  in  their  own. 

As  vain  would  be  the  attempt  to  explain  away  such  alarming  attacks  on  the 
Constitution,  by  pleading  the  difficulty,  in  some  cases,  of  drawing  a  line  be- 
tween the  different  departments  of  power,  or  by  recurring  to  the  little  prece- 
dents which  may  have  crept  in  at  urgent  or  unguarded  moments. 

It  cannot  be  denied,  that  there  may,  in  certain  cases,  be  a  difficulty  in  dis- 
tinguishing the  exact  boundary  between  legislative  and  executive  powers  ;  but 
the  real  friend  of  the  Constitution  and  of  liberty,  by  his  endeavors  to  lessen  or 
avoid  the  difficulty,  will  easily  be  known  from  him  who  labors  to  increase  the 
obscurity,  in  order  to  remove  the  constitutional  landmarks  without  notice. 

Nor  will  it  be  denied  that  precedents  may  be  found  where  the  line  of  sepa- 
ration between  these  powers  has  not  been  sufficiently  regarded ;  where  an  im- 
proper latitude  of  discretion,  particularly,  has  been  given,  or  allowed,  to  the 
executive  departments.  But  what  does  this  prove?  That  the  line  ought  to 
be  considered  as  imaginary ;  that  constitutional  organizations  of  power  ought 
to  lose  their  effect?  No.  It  proves  with  how  much  deliberation  precedents 
ought  to  be  established,  and  with  how  much  caution  arguments  from  them 
should  be  admitted.  It  may  furnish  another  criterion,  also,  between  the  real 
and  ostensible  friend  of  constitutional  liberty.  The  first  will  be  as  vigilant  in 
resisting,  as  the  last  will  be  in  promoting,  the  growth  of  inconsiderate  or  in 
sidious  precedents  into  established  encroachments. 


496  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1795. 

The  next  charge  to  be  examined  is,  the  tendency  of  the  propositions  to  de- 
grade the  United  States  into  French  colonies. 

As  it  is  difficult  to  argue  against  suppositions  made  and  multiplied  at  will, 
so  it  is  happily  impossible  to  impose  on  the  good  sense  of  this  country  by  ar- 
guments which  rest  on  suppositions  only.  In  the  present  question  it  is  first 
supposed  that  the  exercise  of  the  self-evident  and  sovereign  right  of  regulating 
trade  after  the  example  of  all  independent  nations,  and  that  of  the  example 
of  Great  Britain  towards  the  United  States,  would  inevitably  involve  the  Uni- 
ted States  in  a  war  with  Great  Britain.  It  is  then  supposed  that  the  other 
combined  Powers,  though  some  of  them  be  favored  by  the  regulations  pro- 
posed, and  all  of  them  be  jealous  of  the  maritime  predominance  of  Great 
Britain,  would  support  the  wrongs  of  Great  Britain  against  the  rights  of  the 
United  States.  It  is,  lastly,  supposed  that  our  allies,  (the  French,)  in  the  event 
of  success  in  establishing  their  own  liberties,  which  they  owe  to  our  example, 
would  be  willing,  as  well  as  able,  to  rob  us  of  ours,  which  they  assisted  us  in 
obtaining ;  and  that  so  malignant  is  their  disposition  on  this  head,  that  we 
should  not  be  spared,  even  if  embarked  in  a  war  against  her  own  enemy.  To 
finish  the  picture,  it  is  intimated  that  in  the  character  of  allies  we  are  the  more 
exposed  to  this  danger  from  the  secret  and  hostile  ambition  of  France. 

It  will  not  be  expected  that  any  formal  refutation  should  be  wasted  on  ab- 
surdities which  answer  themselves.  None  but  those  who  have  surrendered 
their  reasoning  faculties  to  the  violence  of  their  prejudices,  will  listen  to  sug- 
gestions implying  that  the  freest  nation  in  Europe  is  the  basest  people  on  the 
face  of  the  earth;  that  instead  of  the  friendly  and  festive  sympathy  indulged 
by  the  people  of  the  United  States,  they  ought  to  go  into  mourning  at  every 
triumph  of  the  French  arms  ;  that  instead  of  regarding  the  French  revolution 
as  a  blessing  to  mankind  and  a  bulwark  to  their  own,  they  ought  to  anticipate 
its  success  as  of  all  events  the  most  formidable  to  their  liberty  and  sovereignty ; 
and  that,  calculating  on  the  political  connexion  with  that  nation,  as  the  source 
of  additional  danger  from  its  enmity  and  its  usurpation,  the  first  favorable 
moment  ought  to  be  seized  for  putting  an  end  to  it. 

It  is  not  easy  to  dismiss  this  subject,  however,  without  reflecting,  with  grief 
and  surprise,  on  the  readiness  with  which  many  launch  into  speculations  un- 
friendly to  the  struggles  of  France,  and  regardless  of  the  interesting  relations 
in  which  that  country  stands  to  this.  They  seem  to  be  more  struck  with  every 
circumstance  that  can  be  made  a  topic  of  reproach  or  of  chimerical  apprehen- 
sions, than  with  all  the  splendid  objects  which  are  visible  through  the  gloom 
of  a  revolution.  But  if  there  be  an  American  who  can  see,  without  benevolent 
joy,  the  progress  of  that  liberty  to  which  he  owes  his  own  happiness,  interest, 
at  least,  ought  to  find  a  place  in  his  calculations.  And  if  he  cannot  enlarge 
his  views  to  the  influence  of  the  successes  and  friendship  of  France,  or  our 
safety  as  a  nation,  and  particularly  as  a  Republic,  how  can  he  be  insensible 
to  the  benefits  presented  to  the  United  States  in  her  commerce  ?    The  Freuch 


1705.  POLITICAL    OBSERVATIONS.  407 

markets  consume  more  of  our  best  productions  than  are  consumed  by  any 
other  nation.  If  a  balance  in  specie  be  as  favorable  as  is  usually  supposed, 
the  sum  which  supplies  the  immense  drains  of  our  specie  is  derived  also  from 
the  same  source  more  than  from  any  other.  And  in  the  great  and  precious 
article  of  navigation,  the  sham  of  American  tonnage  employed  in  the  trade 
with  the  French  dominions  gives  to  that  trade  a  distinguished  value;  as  wed 
to  that  part  of  the  Union  which  most  depends  on  ships  and  seamen  for  its 
prosperity,  as  to  that  which  most  requires  them  for  its  protection. 

Whenever  these  considerations  shall  have  that  full  weight  which  a  calm 
review  will  not  fail  to  allow  them,  none  will  wonder  more  than  the  mercantile 
class  of  citizens  themselves,  that  whilst  they  so  anxiously  wait  stipulations  from 
Great  Britain,  which  are  always  within  our  command,  so  much  indifference 
should  be  felt  to  those  more  important  privileges  in  the  trade  of  France,  which, 
if  not  secured  by  a  seasonable  improvement  of  the  commercial  treaty  with  her, 
may  possibly  be  forever  lost  to  us. 

Among  the  aspersions  propagated  against  the  friends,  and  the  merits  arro- 
gated by  the  opponents,  of  the  commercial  propositions,  much  use  has  been 
made  of  the  envoyship  extraordinary  to  Great  Britain.  It  has  been  affirmed 
that  the  former  were  averse  to  the  measure  on  account  of  its  pacific  tendency; 
and  that  it  was  embraced  by  the  latter  as  the  proper  substitute  for  all  com- 
mercial operations  on  the  policy  of  Great  Britain.  It  is  to  be  remembered, 
however, 

1.  That  this  measure  originated  wholly  with  the  Executive. 

2.  That  the  opposition  to  it  in  the  Senate  (as  far  as  the  public  have  any 
knowledge  of  it)  was  made,  not  to  the  measure  of  appointing  an  envoy  extra- 
ordinary, but  to  the  appointment  of  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States  for 
that  service. 

3.  That  the  House  of  Representatives  never  gave  any  opinion  on  the  occa- 
sion, and  that  no  opinion  appears  to  have  been  expressed  in  debate  by  any 
individual  of  that  House  which  can  be  tortured  into  a  disapprobation  of  the 
measure  on  account  of  its  pacific  tendency. 

4.  That  the  measure  did  not  take  place  until  the  commercial  propositions 
had  received  all  the  opposition  that  could  be  given  to  them. 

5.  That  there  is  no  spark  of  evidence,  that  if  the  envoyship  had  never  taken 
place  or  been  thought  of,  the  opponents  of  the  propositions  would  have  con- 
curred in  any  commercial  measures  whatever,  even  after  the  West  India  spoli- 
ations bad  laid  in  their  full  claim  to  the  public  attention. 

But  it  may  be  fairly  asked  of  those  who  opposed  first  the  commercial  prop- 
ositions, and  then  the  non-importation  bill,  and  who  rest  their  justification  on 
the  appointment  of  an  envoy  extraordinary,  wherein  lay  the  inconsistency  be- 
tween these  legislative  and  executive  plans  ? 

Was  it  thought  best  to  appeal  to  the  voluntary  justice  or  liberal  policy  of 
Great  Britain,  and  to  these  only?     This  was  not  certainly  the  case  with  those 

vol.  iv.  32 


498  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1795. 

who  opposed  the  commercial  appeals  to  the  interest  and  the  apprehension  of 
Great  Britain,  because  they  were  the  most  zealous  for  appealing  to  her  fears 
by  military  preparations  and  menaces.  If  these  had  any  meaning,  they  avowed 
that  Great  Britain  was  not  to  be  brought  to  reason  otherwise  than  by  the  dan- 
ger of*  injury  to  herself.  And  such  being  her  disposition,  she  would,  of  course, 
be  most  influenced  by  measures,  of  which  the  comparative  operation  would 
be  most  against  her.  Whether  that  would  be  apprehended  from  measures  of 
the  one  or  the  other  kind  will  easily  be  decided.  But  in  every  view,  [{fear 
was  a  proper  auxiliary  to  negotiation,  the  appeal  to  it  in  the  commercial 
measures  proposed  could  not  be  inconsistent  with  the  envoyship.  The  incon- 
sistency belongs  to  the  reasoning  of  those  who  would  pronounce  it  proper  and 
effectual  to  say  to  Great  Britain,  do  us  justice  or  we  will  seize  on  Canada^ 
though  the  loss  will  be  trifling  to  you,  while  the  cost  will  be  immense  to  us ; 
and  who  pronounce  it  improper  and  ineffectual  to  say  to  Great  Britain,  do  us 
justice  or  you  will  suffer  a  wound  where  you  will  most  of  all  feel  it,  in  a  branch 
of  your  commerce  which  feeds  one  part  of  your  dominions,  and  sends  annually 
to  the  other  a  balance  in  specie  of  more  than  ten  millions  of  dollars. 

The  opponents  of  the  commercial  measures  may  be  asked,  in  the  next 
place,  to  what  cause  the  issue  of  the  envoyship,  if  successful,  ought  to  be  as- 
cribed ? 

Will  it  have  been  the  pure  effect  of  a  benevolent  and  conciliatory  disposition 
in  Great  Britain  towards  the  United  States  ?  This  will  hardly  be  pretended 
by  her  warmest  admirers  and  advocates.  It  is  disproved  by  the  whole  tenor 
of  her  conduct  ever  since  we  were  an  independent  and  republican  nation. 
Had  this  cordial  disposition,  or  even  a  disposition  to  do  us  justice,  been  really 
felt,  the  delay  would  not  have  been  spun  out  to  so  late  a  day.  The  moment 
would  rather  have  been  chosen  when  we  were  least  in  condition  to  viudicate 
our  interest  by  united  councils  and  persevering  efforts.  The  motives  then 
would  have  been  strongest,  and  the  merit  most  conspicuous  ;  instead  of  this 
honourable  and  prudent  course,  it  has  been  the  vigilant  study  of  Great  Brit- 
ain to  take  all  possible  advantage  of  our  embarrassments  ;  nor  has  the  least 
inclination  been  shown  to  relax  her  system,  except  at  the  crisis  in  1783,  al- 
ready mentioned,  when,  not  foreseeing  these  embarrassments,  she  was  alarmed 
for  her  commerce  with  the  United  States. 

Will  the  success  be  aseribable  to  the  respect  paid  to  that  country  by  the 
measure,  or  to  the  talents  and  address  of  the  envoy? 

Such  an  explanation  of  the  fact  is  absolutely  precluded  by  a  series  of  other 
facts. 

Soon  after  the  peace,  Mr.  Adams,  the  present  Vice  President  of  the  United 
States,  was  appointed  Minister  Plenipotentiary  to  the  British  Court.  The 
measure  was  the  more  respectful  as  no  mutual  arrangement  had  been  pre- 
mised between  the  two  countries,  nor  any  intimation  received  from  Great 
Britain  that  the  civility  should  be  returned ;  nor  was  the  civility  returned 


1795.  POLITICAL    OBSERVATIONS.  499 

during  the  whole  period  of  his  residence.  The  manner  in  which  he  was  treated, 
and  the  United  States  through  him,  his  protracted  exertions  and  the  mortify- 
ing inefficaey  of  them  are  too  much  in  the  public  remembrance  to  need  a  re- 
hearsal. 

This  first  essay  on  the  temper  of  Great  Britain  towards  the  United  States 
was  prior  to  the  establishment  of  the  Federal  Constitution.  The  important 
change  produced  in  our  situation  by  this  event  led  to  another  essay,  which  is 
not  unknown  to  the  public.  Although  in  strictness  it  might  not  unreasonably 
have  been  expected,  after  what  had  been  done  in  the  instance  of  Mr.  Adams, 
that  the  advance  towards  a  diplomatic  accommodation  should  then  have  come 
from  Great  Britain,  Mr.  G.  Morris  was  made  an  agent  for  feeling  her  pulse 
and  soothing  her  pride  a  second  time.  The  history  of  his  operations  is  not 
particularly  known.  It  is  certain,  however,  that  this  repetition  of  the  advance 
produced  no  sensible  change  on  her  disposition  towards  us,  much  less  any  act- 
ual compliance  with  our  just  expectations  and  demands.  The  most  that  can 
be  said  is,  that  it  was,  after  a  considerable  interval,  followed  by  the  mission  of 
Mr.  Hammond  to  the  United  States;  who,  as  it  is  said,  however,  refused,  not- 
withstanding the  long  residence  of  Mr.  Adams  at  the  court  of  London  without 
a  return  of  the  civility,  to  commit  the  dignity  of  his  master,  until  the  most  ex- 
plicit assurances  were  given  that  Mr.  Pinckney  should  immediately  counter- 
place  him. 

The  mission  of  this  last  respectable  citizen  forms  a  third  appeal  to  the  jus- 
tice and  good  will  of  the  British  Government  on  the  subjects  between  the  two 
countries.  His  negotiations  on  that  side  the  Atlantic,  as  well  as  those  through 
Mr.  Hammond  on  this,  having  been  laid  before  the  Congress  and  printed  for 
general  information,  will  speak  for  themselves.  It  will  only  be  remarked,  that 
they  terminated  here  in  the  disclosure  that  Mr.  Hammond  had  no  authority, 
either  to  adjust  the  differences  connected  with  the  treaty  of  peace,  or  to  con- 
cur in  any  solid  arrangements  for  reciprocity  in  commerce  and  navigation  5 
and  that  in  Great  Britain  they  terminated  in  the  conviction  of  Mr.  Pinckney 
that  nothing  was  to  be  expected  from  the  voluntary  justice  or  policy  of  that 
country,  and  in  his  advice,  before  quoted,  of  Commercial  Regulations,  as  the 
best  means  for  obtaining  a  compliance  with  our  just  claims. 

All  who  weigh  these  facts  with  candor  will  join  in  concluding  that  the  suc- 
cess of  the  envoyship  must  be  otherwise  explained  than  by  the  operation  of 
diplomatic  compliments,  or  of  personal  talents. 

To  what  causes,  then,  will  the  United  States  be  truly  indebted  for  any  fa- 
vorable result  to  the  envoyship  ? 

Every  well-informed  and  unprejudiced  mind  will  answer,  to  the  following  : 

1.  The  spirit  of  America  expressed  by  the  vote  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives, on  the  subjectof  the  commercial  propositions,  by  the  large  majority  of  that 
house  (overruled  by  the  casting  voice  in  the  Senate)  in  favour  of  the  non  im- 
portation bill,  and  by  the  act  laying  an  embargo.    Although  these  proceedings 


500  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1795. 

would,  doubtless,  have  been  more  efficacious  if  the  two  former  had  obtained 
the  sanction  of  laws,  and  if  the  last  had  not  been  so  soon  repealed,*  yet  they 
must  have  had  no  little  effect  as  warnings  to  the  British  Government,  that  if 
her  obstinacy  should  take  away  the  last  pretext  from  the  opponents  of  such 
measures,  it  might  be  impossible  to  divide  or  mislead  our  public  councils 
with  respect  to  them  in  future. 

There  is  no  room  to  pretend  that  her  relaxation  in  this  case,  if  she  should 
relax,  will  be  the  effect,  not  of  those  proceedings,  but  of  the  ultimate  defeat 
of  them.  Former  defeats  of  a  like  policy  had  repeatedly  taken  place,  and  are 
known  to  have  produced,  instead  of  relaxation,  a  more  confirmed  perseverance 
on  the  part  of  Great  Britain.  Under  the  old  Confederation,  the  United  States 
had  not  the  power  over  commerce  :  of  that  situation  she  took  advantage.  The 
new  government  which  contained  the  power  did  not  evince  the  will  to  exert 
it:  of  that  situation  she  still  took  the  advantage.  S^hould  she  yield,  then,  at 
the  present  juncture,  the  problem  ought  not  to  be  solved,  without  presuming 
her  to  be  satisfied  by  what  has  lately  passed — that  the  United  States  have 
now  not  only  the  power  but  the  will  to  exert  it. 

The  reasoning  is  short  and  conclusive.  In  the  year  1783,  when  Great  Brit- 
ain apprehended  commercial  restrictions  from  the  United  States,  she  was  dis- 
posed to  concede  and  to  accommodate.  From  the  year  1783  to  the  year  1794, 
when  she  apprehended  no  commercial  restrictions,  she  showed  no  disposition 
to  concede  or  to  accommodate.  In  the  year  1794,  when  alarming  evidence 
was  given  of  the  danger  of  commercial  restrictions,  she  did  concede  and  ac- 
commodate. 

If  anything  can  have  weakened  the  operation  of  the  proceedings  above  re- 
ferred to  on  the  British  Government,  it  must  be  the  laboured  and  vehement 
attempts  of  their  opponents  to  show  that  the  United  States  had  little  to  demand 
and  everything  to  dread  from  Great  Britain  ;  that  the  commerce  between  the 
two  countries  was  more  essential  to  us  than  to  her ;  that  our  citizens  would  be 
less  willing  than  her  subjects  to  bear,  and  our  Government  less  able  than  hers 
to  enforce,  restrictions  or  interruptions  of  it :  in  a  word,  that  we  were  more 
dependent  on  her  than  she  was  on  us  ;  and,  therefore,  ought  to  court  her  not 
to  withdraw  from  us  her  supplies,  though  chiefly  luxuries,  instead  of  threat- 
ening to  withdraw  from  her  our  supplies,  though  mostly  necessaries. 

It  is  difficult  to  say  whether  the  indiscretion  or  the  fallacy  of  such  argu- 
ments be  the  more  remarkable  feature  in  them.  All  that  can  be  hoped  is, 
that  an  antidote  to  their  mischievous  tendency  in  Great  Britain  may  be  found 
in  the  consciousness  there  of  the  errors  on  which  they  are  founded,  and  the 
contempt  which  they  will  be  known  to  have  excited  in  this  country. 

2.  The  other  cause  will  be,  the  posture  into  which  Europe  has  been  thrown 

*  That  this  is  particularly  true  of  the  embargo  is  certain,  as  well  from  the  known  effect  of  that 
measure  ia  the  West  Indies  as  from  the  admission  of  the  West  India  planters  in  their  late  petition 
to  the  Kiug  and  Council  of  Great  Britain. 


1795.  POLITICAL     OBSERVATIONS.  5Q1 

by  the  war  with  France,  and  particularly  by  the  campaign  of  1794.  The  com. 
bined  armies  have  everywhere  ielt  the  superii  »r  valour,  discipline,  and  resources 
of  their  Republican  enemies.  Prussia,  after  heavy  and  perfidious  [?J  draughts 
on  the  British  Treasury,  has  retired  from  the  common  standard  to  contend  with 
new  dangers  peculiar  to  herself.  Austria,  worn  out  in  unavailing  resistence, 
her  arms  disgraced,  her  treasure  exhausted,  and  her  vassals  discontented,  seeks 
her  last  consolation  in  the  same  source  of  British  subsidy.  The  Dutch,  in- 
stead of  continuing  their  proportion  of  aids  for  the  war,  have  their  whole  fac- 
ulties turned  over  to  France.  Spain,  with  all  her  wealth  and  all  her  pride,  is 
palsied  in  every  nerve,  and  forced  to  the  last  resorts  of  royalty,  to  a  reduction 
of  salaries  and  pensions,  and  to  the  hoards  of  superstition.  Great  Britain  her- 
self has  seen  her  military  glory  eclipsed,  her  projects  confounded,  her  hopes 
blasted,  her  marine  threatened,  her  resources  overcharged,  and  her  Govern, 
ment  in  danger  of  losing  its  energy,  by  the  despotic  excesses  into  which  it  has 
been  overstrained. 

If,  under  such  circumstances,  she  does  not  abandon  herself  to  apathy  and 
despair,  it  is  because  she  finds  her  credit  still  alive,  and  in  that  credit  sees 
some  possibility  of  making  terms  with  misfortune.  But  what  is  the  basis  of 
that  credit?  Her  commerce.  And  what  is  the  most  valuable  remnant  of  that 
resource?  The  commerce  with  the  U.  States.  Will  she  risk  this  best  part 
of  her  last  resource,  by  persevering  in  her  selfish  and  unjust  treatment  of  the 
United  States? 

Time  will  give  a  final  answer  to  this  question.  All  that  can  be  now  pro- 
nounced is,  that  if,  on  the  awful  precipice  to  which  G.  Britain  is  driven,  she 
will  open  neither  her  eyes  to  her  danger  nor  her  heart  to  her  duty,  her  char- 
acter must  be  a  greater  contrast  to  the  picture  of  it  drawn  by  the  opponents 
of  the  commercial  measures  than  could  have  easily  been  imagined.  If,  on  the 
other  baud,  she  should  relent  and  consult  her  reason,  the  change  will  be  ac- 
counted for  by  her  prospects  on  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic,  and  the  counte- 
nance exhibited  on  this;  without  supposing  her  character  to  vary  in  a  single 
feature  from  the  view  of  it  entertained  by  the  friends  of  such  measures. 

That  the  rising  spirit  of  America,  and  the  successes  of  France,  will  have 
been  the  real  causes  of  any  favorable  terms  obtained  by  the  mission  of  Mr. 
Jav,  cannot  be  controverted.  Had  the  same  forbearance  which  was  tried  for 
ten  years  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  been  continued,  and  had  the  com- 
bined Powers  proceeded  in  the  victorious  career  which  has  signalized  the 
French  arms,  under  this  reverse  of  circumstances  the  most  bigoted  English- 
man will  be  ashamed  to  say  that  any  relaxing  change  in  the  policy  of  his 
Government  was  to  be  hoped  for  by  the  United  States. 

Such  are  the  reflections  which  occur  on  the  supposition  of  a  successful  issue 
to  the  envoyship.  Should  it  unhappily  turn  out  that  neither  the  new  counte- 
nance presented  by  America,  nor  the  adverse  foi  tunes  of  Great  Britaiu,  can 
bend  the  latter  to  a  reasonable  accommodation,  it  may  be  worth  while  to  in- 


502  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1795. 

qiire  what  will  probably  bo  the  evidence  furnished  by  the  friends  and  adver- 
saries of  commercial  measures  with  respect  to  their  comparative  attachments 
to  peace?* 

If  any  regard  be  paid  to  consistency,  those  who  opposed  all  such  measures 
must  be  for  an  instant  resort  to  arms.  With  them  there  was  no  alternative* 
but  negotiation  or  war.  Their  language  was,  let  us  try  the  former,  but  be  pre- 
pared for  the  latter  ;  if  the  olive  branch  fail,  let  the  sword  vindicate  our  rights, 
as  it  has  vindicated  the  rights  of  other  nations.  A  real  war  is  both  more  hon- 
ourable and  more  eligible  than  commercial  regulations.  In  these  G.  B.  is 
an  over-match  for  us. 

On  the  other  side,  the  friends  of  commercial  measures,  if  consistent,  will 
prefer  these  measures,  as  an  intermediate  experiment  between  negotiation  and 
war.  They  will  persist  in  their  language,  that  Great  Britain  is  more  depend- 
ent on  us  than  we  are  on  her ;  that  this  has  ever  been  the  American  senti- 
ment, and  is  the  true  basis  of  American  policy ;  that  war  should  not  be  re- 
sorted to  till  everything  short  of  war  has  been  tried  ;  that  if  Great  Britain  be 
invulnerable  to  our  attacks,  it  is  in  her  fleets  and  armies;  that  if  the  United 
States  can  bring  her  to  reason  at  all,  the  surest  as  well  as  the  cheapest  means 
will  be  a  judicious  system  of  commercial  operations ;  that  here  the  United 
States  are  unquestionably  an  over-match  for  Great  Britain. 

It  must  be  the  ardent  prayer  of  all,  that  the  occasion  may  not  happen  for 
such  a  test  of  the  consistency  and  the  disposition  o'f  those  whose  counsels  were 
so  materially  different  on  the  subject  of  a  commercial  vindication  of  our  rights. 
Should  it  be  otherwise  ordained,  the  public  judgment  will  pronounce  on  which 
side  the  politics  were  most  averse  to  war,  and  most  anxious  for  every  pacific 
effort  that  might  at  the  same  time  be  an  efficient  one,  in  preference  to  that  last 
and  dreadful  resort  of  injured  nations. 

There  remain  two  subjects  belonging  to  the  session  of  Congress  under  re- 
view, on  each  of  which  some  comments  are  made  proper  by  the  misrepresenta- 
tions which  have  been  propagated. 

The  first  is,  The  naval  armament. 

The  second,  The  new  taxes  then  established. 

As  to  the  first,  it  appears  from  the  debates  and  other  accounts,  to  have  been 
urged  in  favour  of  the  measure,  that  six  frigates  of  one  hundred  and  eighty- 
four  guns,  to  be  stationed  at  the  mouth  of  the  Mediterranean,  would  be  suffi- 
cient to  protect  the  American  trade  against  the  Algerine  pirates;  that  such  a 
force  would  not  cost  more  than  six  hundred  thousand  dollars,  including  an 
outfit  of  stores  and  provisions  for  six  months,  and  might  be  built  in  time  to 
take  their  station  by  July  or  August  last;  that  the  expense  of  this  armament 
would  be  fully  justified  by  the  importance  of  our  trade  to  the  south  of  Europe ; 
that  without  such  a  protection  the  whole  trade  of  the  Atlantic  would  be  ex- 

*  When  this  was  written  the  result  of  Mr.  Jay's  mission  was  wholly  unknown. 


1795.  POLITICAL     OBSERVATIONS.  g()3 

posed  to  depredation  ;  nay,  that  the  American  coast  might  not  escape  the  en- 
terprising avarice  of  these  roving  barbarians;  that  such  an  effort  on  the  part 
of  the  United  States  was  particularly  due  to  the  unfortunate  citizens  alreadj 
groaning  in  chains  and  pining  in  despair,  as  well  as  to  those  who  might  other- 
wise be  involved  in  the  same  fate.  Other  considerations  of  less  influence  mav 
have  entered  into  the  decision  on  the  same  side. 

On  the  other  side,  it  was  said  that  the  force  was  insufficient  for  the  object; 
that  the  expense  would  be  greater  than  was  estimated ;  that  there  Was  a  limit 
to  the  expense  which  could  be  afforded  for  the  protection  of  any  branch  of 
trade ;  that  the  aggregate  value  of  the  annual  trade,  export  and  import,  to 
Spain  and  Portugal,  appeared,  from  authentic  documents,  not  to  exceed  three 
and  an  half  millions  of  dollars  ;*  that  the  profit,  only,  on  this  amount  was  to 
be  compared  with  the  expense  of  the  frigates  ;  that  if  the  American  vessels  en- 
gaged in  those  channels  should  give  place  to  vessels  at  peace  with  Algiers,  they 
would  repair  to  the  channels  quitted  by  the  latter  vessels,  so  that  it  would  be 
rather  a  change  than  a  loss  of  employment;  that  the  other  distant  branches 
of  our  trade  would  be  little  affected,  and  our  own  coast  not  at  all ;  that  the  frig- 
ates, at  so  great  a  distance  on  a  turbulent  sea,  would  be  exposed  to  dangers,  as 
well  as  attended  with  expenses,  not  to  be  calculated  ;  and  if  stationed  where 
intended,  would  leave  our  trade  up  the  Mediterranean  as  unprotected  as  it  is 
at  present:  That  in  addition  to  these  considerations,  the  frigates  would  not 
be  ready  by  the  time  stated,  nor  probably  until  the  war  and  the  occasion  would 
be  over ;  that  if  the  removal  of  the  Portuguese  squadron  from  the  blockade 
really  proceeded,  as  was  alleged,  from  Great  Britain,  she  would,  under  some 
pretext  or  other,  contrive  to  defeat  the  object  of  the  frigates ;  that  if  Great 
Britain  was  not  at  the  bottom  of  the  measure,  the  interest  which  Portugal  had 
in  our  trade,  which  supplies  her  with  the  necessaries  of  life,  would  soon  restore 
the  protection  she  had  withdrawn ;  that  it  would  be  more  effectual,  as  well  as 
cheaper,  to  concert  arrangements  with  Portugal,  by  which  the  United  States 
would  be  subjected  to  an  equitable  share  only,  instead  of  taking  on  themselves 
the  whole  of  the  burden ;  that  as  to  our  unfortunate  citizens  in  captivity,  the 
frigates  could  neither  be  in  time  nor  of  force  to  relieve  them ;  that  monev 
alone  could  do  this,  and  that  a  sufficient  sum  ought  to  be  provided  for  the 
purpose  ;  that  it  was  moreover  to  be  considered,  that  if  there  were  any  dispo- 
sition in  Great  Britain  to  be  irritated  into  a  war  with  us,  or  to  seek  an  occa- 
sion for  it,  those  who,  on  other  questions,  had  taken  that  ground  of  argument 
ought  to  be  particularly  aware  of  danger  from  the  collision  of  naval  armaments 
within  the  sphere  of  British  jealousy,  and  in  the  way,  perhaps,  of  a  favourite 
object. 

No  undue  blame  is  meant  to  be  thrown  on  those  who  did  not  yield  to  this 

*  It  appears  by  a  late  official  document  that  the  amount  of  tbe  trade  since  that  period  has  con-, 
siderably  increased  in  value;  but  it  may  be  remarked,  that  in  the  same  ratio  the  motives  to  re- 
new the  protection  have  been  strengthened  in  Portugal  and  Spain. 


504  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1795. 

reasoning,  however  conclusive  it  may  now  appear.  The  vote  in  favor  of  the 
measure,  was,  indeed,  so  checkered,  that  it  cannot  even  be  attributed  to  the 
influence  of  party.  It  is  but  justice,  at  the  same  time,  to  those  who  opposed 
the  measure,  to  remark,  that  instead  of  the  frigates  being  at  their  destined  sta- 
tion in  July  or  August  last,  the  keel  of  one  only  was  laid  in  December;  the 
timber  for  the  rest  being  then  in  the  forest,  and  the  whole  of  the  present  year 
stated  to  be  necessary  for  their  completion ;  that,  consequently,  it  is  nearly 
certain  now  they  will  not  be  in  service  before  the  war  in  Europe  will  be  over,* 
and  that  in  the  mean  time  it  has  turned  out  as  was  foretold,  that  Portugal  has 
felt  sufficient  motives  to  renew  the  blockade ;  so  that  if  the  frigates  had  been 
adapted  to  the  original  object  they  would  not  be  required  for  it;  more  espe- 
cially as  it  has  likewise  turned  out,  according  to  another  anticipation,  that 
money  would  alone  be  the  agent  for  restoring  the  captive  exiles  tu  their  free- 
dom and  their  country. 

It  may  possibly  be  said  that  the  frigates,  though  not  necessary  or  proper  for 
the  service  first  contemplated,  may  usefully  be  applied  to  the  security  of  our 
coasts,  against  pirates,  privateers,  and  smugglers.  This  is  a  distinct  question. 
The  sole  and  avowed  object  of  the  naval  armament  was  the  protection  of  our 
trade  against  the  Algerines.  To  that  object  the  force  is  appropriated  by  the 
law  itself.  The  President  can  apply  it  to  no  other.  If  any  other  now  presents 
itself  it  may  fairly  be  now  discussed ;  but  as  it  was  not  the  object  then,  the 
measure  cannot  be  tested  by  it  now.  If  there  be  sufficient  reasons  of  any  sort 
for  such  a  naval  establishment,  those  who  disapproved  it  for  au  impracticable 
and  impolitic  object  may,  with  perfect  consistency,  allow  these  reasons  their 
full  weight.  It  is  much  to  be  questioned,  however,  whether  any  good  reason 
could  be  found  for  going  on  with  the  whole  undertaking ;  besides,  that  in  gen- 
eral, the  commencement  of  political  measures  under  one  pretext,  and  the  pros- 
ecution of  them  under  another,  has  always  an  aspect  that  justifies  circumspec- 
tion, if  not  suspicion. 

With  respect  to  the  new  taxes,  the  second  remaining  subject,  a  very  brief 
explanation  will  be  sufficient. 

From  a  general  view  of  the  proceedings  of  Congress  on  this  subject,  it 
appears  that  the  advocates  for  the  new  taxes  urged  them — 1st  On  the  prob- 
ability of  a  diminution  of  the  import  for  1794,  as  an  effect  of  some  of  the  ques- 
tions agitated  in  Congress  on  the  amount  of  exports  from  Great  Britain  to  the 
United  States.  2dly.  On  the  probability  of  war  with  Great  Britain,  which 
would  still  further  destroy  the  revenue,  at  the  same  time  that  it  would  beget 
an  immense  addition  to  the  public  expenditures.    On  the  first  of  these  points, 

*  It  may  bo  added,  that  the  original  estimate  and  appropriation  for  the  annual  support  of  the 
frigates  was  two  hundred  and  forty -seven  thousand  uine  hundred  dollars  only;  whereas  the  sum 
required  at  the  last  session,  by  the  Secretary  of  War,  for  six  months'  support,  in  the  year  1795,  is 
two  hundred  twenty-four  thousand  seven  hundred  and  fifty-four  dollars;  making  the  ainual 
support  four  hundred  forty-nine  thousand  five  hundred  and  eight  dollars. 


1795.  POLITICAL    OBSERVATIONS.  505 

those  who  did  not  concur  in  the  new  taxes,  at  leasl  in  all  of  them,  denied  the 
probability  of  any  material  diminution  of  the  import  without  a  war.  On  the 
other  point,  they  denied  any  such  probability  of  a  war  as  to  require  what  was 
proposed;  and  in  both  these  opinions  they  have  been  justified  by  subsequent 
experience.  War  has  not  taken  place,  nor  does  it  appear  ever  to  have  been 
meditated,  unless  in  the  event  of  subverting  the  French  Republic,  which  was 
never  probable ;  whilst  the  revenue  from  the  import,  instead  of  being  dimin- 
ished, has  very  considerably  exceeded  any  former  amount. 

It  will  not  be  improper  to  remark,  as  a  further  elucidation  of  this  subject — 
1st.  That  most,  if  not  all,  who  refused  to  concur  in  some  of  the  new  taxes  as 
not  justified  by  the  occasion,  actually  concurred  in  others  which  were  least 
objectionable,  as  an  accommodating  precaution  against  contingencies.  2d. 
That  the  objection  to  one  of  the  taxes  was  its  breach  of  the  Constitution — an 
objection  insuperable  in  its  nature,  and  which  there  is  reason  to  believe  will 
be  established  by  the  judicial  authority,  if  ever  brought  to  that  test;  and  that 
the  objections  to  others  were  such  as  had  always  had  weight  with  the  most  en- 
lightened patriots  of  America.  3.  That  in  the  opinions  of  the  most  zealous 
patrons  of  new  Ways  and  Means,  the  occasion,  critical  as  they  pressed  it,  did 
not  ultimately  justify  all  the  taxes  proposed.  It  appears,  in  particular,  that  a 
bill  imposing  a  variety  of  duties,  mostly  in  the  nature  of  stamp  duties,  into 
which  a  duty  on  transfers  of  stock  had  been  inserted  as  an  amendment,  was 
in  the  last  stage  defeated  by  those  who  had,  in  general,  urged  the  new  taxes, 
and  this  very  bill  itself  in  the  earlier  stage  of  it. 

These,  with  the  preceding  observations  on  a  very  interesting  period  of  Con- 
gressional history,  will  be  left  to  the  candid  judgment  of  the  public.  Such  as 
may  not  before  have  viewed  the  transactions  of  that  period  through  any  other 
medium  than  the  misrepresentations  which  have  been  circulated,  will  have  an 
opportunity  of  doing  justice  to  themselves  as  well  as  to  others.  And  no  doubt 
can  be  entertained,  that  in  this,  as  in  all  other  cases,  it  will  be  found  that  truth, 
however  stifled  or  perverted  for  a  time,  will  finally  triumph  in  the  detection  of 
calumny,  and  in  the  contempt  which  awaits  its  authors. 

April  20,  1795. 


VIRGINIA  RESOLUTIONS  OF  1798. 


In  the  House  of  Delegates. 

Friday,  December  21,  1798 

[1  ]  Resolved,  That  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia  doth  unequivocally 
expi  ess  a  firm  resolution  to  maintain  and  defend  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  Constitution  of  this  State,  against  every  aggression  either 
foreign  oi  domestic  ;  and  that  they  will  support  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  in  all  measures  warranted  by  the  former. 

[2.]  That  this  Assembly  most  solemnly  declares  a  warm  attachment  to  the 
Union  of  the  States,  to  maintain  which  it  pledges  all  its  powers  ;  and  that, 
for  this  end,  it  is  their  duty  to  watch  over  and  oppose  every  infraction  of 
those  principles  which  constitute  the  only  basis  of  that  Union,  because  a  faith- 
ful observance  of  them  can  alone  secure  its  existence  and  the  public  happi- 
ness. 

[3.]  That  this  Assembly  doth  explicitly  and  peremptorily  declare  that  it 
views  the  powers  of  the  Federal  Government  as  resulting  from  the  compact  to 
which  the  States  are  parties,  as  limited  by  the  plain  sense  and  intention  of 
the  instrument  constituting  that  compact;  as  no  further  valid  than  they  are 
authorized  by  the  grants  enumerated  in  that  compact ;  and  that,  in  case  of  a 
deliberate,  palpable,  and  dangerous  exercise  of  other  powers  not  granted  by 
the  said  compact,  the  States,  who  are  parties  thereto,  have  the  right  and  are 
in  duty  bound  to  interpose  for  arresting  the  progress  of  the  evil,  and  for 
maintaining  within  their  respective  limits  the  authorities,  rights,  and  liber- 
ties appertaining  to  them. 

[4.]  That  the  General  Assembly  doth  also  express  its  deep  regret,  that  a  spi- 
rit has  in  sundry  instances  been  manifested  by  the  Federal  Government  to  en- 
large its  powers  by  forced  constructions  of  the  constitutional  charter  which  de- 
fines them  ;  and  that  indications  have  appeared  of  a  design  to  expound  eertain 
general  phrases  (which,  having  been  copied  from  the  very  limited  grant  of 
powors  in  the  former  Articles  of  Confederation,  were  the  less  liable  to  be  mis- 
construed) so  as  to  destroy  the  meaning  and  effect  of  the  particular  enumer- 
tion  which  necessarily  explains  and  limits  the  general  phrases  ;  and  so  as  to 
consolidate  the  States,  by  degrees,  into  one  sovereignty,  the  obvious  tendency 
and  inevitable  result  of  which  would  be  to  transform  the  present  republican 
system  of  the  United  States  into  an  absolute,  or,  at  best,  a  mixed  monarchy. 

[5.]  That  the  General  Assembly  doth  particularly  protest  against  the  palp- 
able and  alarming  infractions  of  the  Constitution  in  the  two  late  eases  of  the 
"Alien  and  Sedition  Acts,"  passed  at  the  last  session  of  Congress ;  the 


1798.  VIRGINIA   PROCEEDINGS.  507 

first  of  which  exercises  a  power  nowhere  delegated  to  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, and  which,  by  uniting  legislative  and  judicial  powers  to  those  of  [tin'] 
executive,  subvert  the  general  principles  of  free  government,  as  well  as  the 
particular  organization  and  positive  provisions  of  the  Federal  Constitution  ; 
and  the  other  of  which  acts  exercises,  in  like  manner,  a  power  not  delegated 
by  the  Constitution,  but,  on  the  contrary,  expressly  and  positively  forbidden 
by  one  of  the  amendments  thereto, — a  power  which,  more  than  any  other, 
ought  to  produce  universal  alarm,  because  it  is  levelled  against  the  right  of 
freely  examining  public  characters  and  measures,  and  of  free  communica- 
tion among  the  people  thereon,  which  has  ever  been  justly  deemed  the  only 
effectual  guardian  of  every  other  right. 

[6.]  That  this  State  having  by  its  Convention  which  ratified  the  Federa. 
Constitution  expressly  declared  that,  among  other  essential  rights,  "  the  lib- 
erty of  conscience  and  of  the  press  cannot  be  cancelled,  abridged,  restrained  or 
modified  by  any  authority  of  the  United  States,"  and  from  its  extreme  anxiety 
to  guard  these  rights  from  every  possible  attack  of  sophistry  or  ambition,  hav- 
ing, with  other  States,  recommended  an  amendment  for  that  purpose,  which 
amendment  was  in  due  time  annexed  to  the  Constitution, — it  would  mark  a 
reproachful  inconsistency  and  criminal  degeneracy,  if  an  indifference  were 
now  shown  to  the  palpable  violation  of  one  of  the  rights  thus  declared  and  se- 
cured, and  to  the  establishment  of  a  precedent  which  may  be  fatal  to  the  other. 

[7.]  That  the  good  people  of  this  Commonwealth,  having  ever  felt  and  con- 
tinuing to  feel  the  most  sincere  affection  for  their  brethren  of  the  other  States, 
the  truest  anxiety  for  establishing  and  perpetuating  the  union  of  all  and  the 
most  scrupulous  fidelity  to  that  Constitution,  which  is  the  pledge  of  mutual 
friendship,  and  the  instrument  of  mutual  happiness,  the  General  Assembly 
doth  solemnly  appeal  to  the  like  dispositions  of  the  other  States,  in  confi- 
dence that  they  will  concur  with  this  Commonwealth  in  declaring,  as  it  does 
hereby  declare,  that  the  acts  aforesaid  are  unconstitutional ;  and  that  the 
necessary  and  proper  measures  will  be  taken  by  each  for  co-operating  with 
this  State,  in  maintainiag  unimpaired  the  authorities,  rights,  and  liberties 
reserved  to  the  States  respectively,  or  to  the  people. 

[8.]  That  the  Governor  be  desired  to  transmit  a  copy  of  the  foregoing  resolu- 
tions to  the  Executive  authority  of  each  of  the  other  States,  with  a  request  that 
the  same  may  be  communicated  to  the  Legislature  thereof;  and  that  a  copy  be 
furnished  to  each  of  the  Senators  and  Representatives  representing  this  State 
in  the  Congress  of  the  United  States. 

Attest:  JOHN  STEWART. 

1798,  December  24.     Agreed  to  by  the  Senate. 

H.  BROOKE. 

A  true  copy  from  the  original  deposited  in  the  office  of  the  General 
Assembly. 

JOHN  STEWART,  Keeper  of  Rolls. 


VIRGINIA  RESOLUTIONS  OF  1799. 


[In  the  House  of  Delegates, 

Friday,  January  4,  1799. 

Resolved,  That  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia  will  co-operate  with  the 
authorities  of  the  United  States  in  maintaining  the  independence,  Union,  and 
Constitution  thereof,  against  the  hostilities  or  intrigues  of  all  foreign  Powers 
whatsoever;  and  that  although  differences  of  opinion  do  exist  in  relation  to  in- 
ternal and  domestic  measures,  yet  a  charge  that  there  is  a  party  in  this  Com- 
monwealth under  the  influence  of  any  foreign  Power  is  unfounded  and  calum- 
nious. 

Resolved,  That  the  General  Assembly  do,  aud  will  always,  behold  with  indig- 
nation, depredations  on  our  commerce,  insults  on  our  citizens,  impressments 
of  our  seamen,  or  any  other  injuries  committed  on  the  people  or  Government 
of  the  United  States  by  foreign  nations. 

Resolved,  Nevertheless,  that  our  security  from  invasion  and  the  force  of  our 
militia  render  a  standing  army  unnecessary;  that  the  policy  of  the  United 
States  forbids  a  war  of  aggression ;  that  our  whole  reliance  ought  to  be  on 
ourselves;  and,  therefore,  that  while  we  will  repel  invasion  at  every  hazard,  we 
shall  deplore  and  deprecate  the  evils  of  war  for  any  other  cause. 

Resolved,  That  a  copy  of  the  foregoing  resolutions  be  sent  to  each  of  the 
Senators  and  Representatives  of  this  State  in  Congress. 

Attest:  JOHN  STEWART,  C.  H.  D. 

1799,  January  10th.     Agreed  to  by  the  Senate. 

H.  BROOKE,  C.  S. 

A  true  copy  from  the  original  deposited  in  the  office  of  the  General 
Assembly. 

JOHN  STEWART,  Keeper  of  Rolls.] 


ADDRESS  OF  THE  GENERAL  ASSEMBLY  TO  THE 

PEOPLE  OF  THE  COMMONWEALTH 

OF  VIRGINIA. 


Fellow-Citizens, — Unwilling  to  shrink  from  our  representative  responsi 
bility,  conscious  of  the  purity  of  our  motives,  but  acknowledging  your  right  to 
supervise  our  conduct,  we  invite  your  serious  attention  to  the  emergency  which 
dictated  the  subjoined  resolutions.  Whilst  we  disdain  to  alarm  you  by  ill- 
founded  jealousies,  we  recommend  an  investigation,  guided  by  the  coolness  of 
wisdom,  and  a  decision  bottomed  on  firmness  but  tempered  with  moderation. 

It  would  be  perfidious  in  those  entrusted  with  the  guardianship  of  the  State 
sovereignty,  and  acting  under  the  solemn  obligation  of  the  following  oath,  "I 
do  swear  that  I  will  support  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,"  not  to 
warn  you  of  encroachments,  which,  though  clothed  with  the  pretext  of  neces- 
sity, or  disguised  by  arguments  of  expediency,  may  yet  establish  precedents 
which  may  ultimately  devote  a  generous  and  unsuspicious  people  to  all  the 
consequences  of  usurped  power. 

Encroachments  springing  from  a  government  whose  organization  cannot  be 
maintained  without  the  co-operation  of  the  States,  furnish  the  strongest  ex- 
citements upon  the  State  Legislatures  to  watchfulness,  and  impose  upon  them 
the  strongest  obligation  to  preserve  unimpaired  the  line  of  partition. 

The  acquiescence  of  the  States  under  infractions  of  the  federal  compact, 
would  either  beget  a  speedy  consolidation,  by  precipitating  the  State  govern- 
ments into  impotency  and  contempt;  or. prepare  the  way  for  a  revolution,  by 
a  repetition  of  these  infractions,  until  the  people  are  roused  to  appear  in  the 
majesty  of  their  strength.  It  is  to  avoid  these  calamities  that  we  exhibit  to 
the  people  the  momentous  question,  whether  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  shall  yield  to  a  construction  which  defies  every  restraint  and  overwhelms 
the  best  hopes  of  republicanism. 

Exhortations  to  disregard  domestic  usurpation,  until  foreign  danger  shall 
have  passed,  is  an  artifice  which  may  be  forever  used ;  because  the  possessors 
of  power,  who  are  the  advocates  for  its  extension,  can  ever  create  national 
embarrassments,  to  be  successively  employed  to  soothe  the  people  into  sleep, 
whilst  that  power  is  swelling,  silently,  secretly,  and  fatally.  Of  the  some  char- 
acter are  insinuations  of  a  foreign  influence,  which  seize  upon  a  laudable  en- 
thusiasm against  danger  from  abroad,  and  distort  it  by  an  unnatural  applica- 
tion, so  as  to  blind  your  eyes  against  danger  at  home. 

The  sedition  act  presents  a  scene  which  was  never  expected  by  the  early 


510  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1790. 

friends  of  the  Constitution.  It  was  then  admitted  that  the  State  sovereignties 
were  only  diminished  by  powers  specifically  enumerated,  or  necessary  to  carry 
the  specified  powers  into  effect.  Now,  Federal  authority  is  deduced  from  im- 
plication ;  and  from  the  existence  of  State  law,  it  is  inferred  that  Congress 
possess  a  similar  power  of  legislation;  whence  Congress  will  be  endowed  with 
a  power  of  legislation  in  all  cases  whatsoever,  and  the  States  will  be  stripped 
of  every  right  reserved,  by  the  concurrent  claims  of  a  paramount  Legislature. 

The  sedition  act  is  the  offspring  of  these  tremendous  pretensions,  which  in- 
flict a  death-wound  on  the  sovereignty  of  the  States. 

For  the  honor  of  American  understanding,  we  will  not  believe  that  the  peo- 
ple have  been  allured  into  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  by  an  affectation 
of  defining  powers,  whilst  the  preamble  would  admit  a  constructioii  which 
would  erect  the  will  of  Congress  into  a  power  paramount  in  all  cases,  and 
therefore  limited  in  none.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  evident  that  the  objects  for 
which  the  Constitution  was  formed  were  deemed  attainable  only  by  a  particu- 
lar enumeration  and  specification  of  each  power  granted  to  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment; reserving  all  others  to  the  people,  or  to  the  States.  And  yet  it  is  in 
vain  we  search  for  any  specified  power  embracing  the  right  of  legislation 
against  the  freedom  of  the  press. 

Had  the  States  been  despoiled  of  their  sovereignty  by  the  generality  of  the 
preamble,  and  had  the  Federal  Government  been  endowed  with  whatever  they 
should  judge  to  be  instrumental  towards  union,  justice,  tranquillity,  com- 
mon defence,  general  welfare,  and  the  preservation  of  liberty,  nothing  could 
have  been  more  frivolous  than  an  enumeration  of  powers. 

It  is  vicious  in  the  extreme  to  calumniate  meritorious  public  servants ;  but 
it  is  both  artful  and  vicious  to  arouse  the  public  indignation  against  calumny 
in  order  to  conceal  usurpation.  Calumny  is  forbidden  by  the  laws,  usurpa- 
tion by  the  Constitution.  Calumny  injures  individuals,  usurpation.  States. 
Calumny  may  be  redressed  by  the  common  judicatures;  usurpation  can  only 
be  controlled  by  the  act  of  society.  Ought  usurpation,  which  is  most  mis- 
ohievous,  to  be  rendered  less  hateful  by  calumny,  which,  though  injurious,  is 
in  a  degree  less  pernicious?  But  the  laws  for  the  correction  of  calumny  were 
not  defective.  Every  libellous  writing  or  expression  might  receive  its  punish- 
ment in  the  State  courts,  from  juries  summoned  by  an  officer,  who  does  not 
receive  his  appointment  from  the  President,  and  is  under  no  influence  to  court 
the  pleasure  of  Government,  whether  it  injured  public  officers  or  private  citi- 
zens. Nor  is  there  any  distinction  in  the  Constitution  empowering  Congress 
exclusively  to  punish  calumny  directed  against  an  officer  of  the  General  Gov- 
ernment;  so  that  a  construction  assuming  the  power  of  protecting  the  reputa- 
tion of  a  citizen  officer  will  extend  to  the  case  of  any  other  citizen.  <ind  open 
to  Congress  a  right  of  legislation  in  every  conceivable  case  which  can  arise 
between  individuals. 
'     In  answer  to  this,  it  is  urged  that  every  Government  possesses  an  inherent 


1799.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  5H 

power  of  self-preservation,  entitling  it  to  do  whatever  it  shall  judge  necessary 
for  that  purpose. 

This  is  a  repetition  of  the  doctrine  of  implication  and  expediency  in  differ- 
ent language,  and  admits  of  a  similar  and  decisive  answer,  namely,  that  as 
the  powers  of  Congress  are  defined,  powers  inherent,  implied,  or  expedient, 
are  obviously  the  creatures  of  ambition  ;  because  the  care  expended  in  defi- 
ning powers  would  otherwise  have  been  superfluous.  Powers  extracted  from 
such  sources  will  be  indefinitely  multiplied  by  the  aid  of  armies  and  patron 
age,  which,  with  the  impossibility  of  controlling  them  by  any  demareat'on. 
would  presently  terminate  reasoning,  and  ultimately  swallow  up  the  State 
sovereignties. 

So  insatiable  is  a  love  of  power  that  it  has  resorted  to  a  distinction  between 
the  freedom  and  licentiousness  of  the  press  for  the  purpose  of  converting  the 
third  amendment  of  the  Constitution,  which  was  dictated  by  the  most  lively 
anxiety  to  preserve  that  freedom,  into  an  instrument  for  abridging  it.  Thus 
usurpation  even  justifies  itself  by  a  precaution  against  usurpation  ;  and  thus 
an  amendment  universally  designed  to  quiet  every  fear  is  adduced  as  the 
source  of  an  act  which  has  produced  general  terror  and  alarm. 

The  distinction  between  liberty  and  licentiousness  is  still  a  repetition  of  the 
Protean  doctrine  of  implication,  which  is  ever  ready  to  work  its  ends  by  vary- 
ing its  ^hape.  By  its  help,  the  judge  as  to  what  is  licentious  may  escape 
through  any  constitutional  restriction.  Under  it  men  of  a  particular  religious 
opinion  might  be  excluded  from  office,  because  such  exclusion  would  not 
amount  to  an  establishment  of  religion,  and  because  it  might  be  said  that  their 
opinions  were  licentious.  And  under  it  Congress  might  denominate  a  religion 
to  be  heretical  and  licentious,  and  proceed  to  its  suppression.  Remember  that 
precedents  once  established  are  so  much  positive  power ;  and  that  the  nation 
which  reposes  on  the  pillow  of  political  confidence,  will  sooner  or  later  end  it  j 
political  existence  in  a  deadly  lethargy.  Remember,  also,  that  it  is  to  the 
press  mankind  are  indebted  for  having  dispelled  the  clouds  which  long  encom- 
passed religion,  for  disclosing  her  genuine  lustre,  and  disseminating  her  salu- 
tary doctrines. 

The  sophistry  of  a  distinction  between  the  liberty  and  the  licentiousness  of 
the  press  is  so  forcibly  exposed  in  a  late  memorial  from  our  late  envoys  to  the 
Minister  of  the  French  Republic,  that  we  here  present  it  to  you  in  their  own 
words : 

"  The  genius  of  the  Constitution,  and  the  opiaion  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  cannot  be 
overruled  by  those  who  administer  the  Government.  Among  those  principles  deemed  sacred  in 
America,  among  those  sacred  rights  considered  as  forming  the  bulwark  of  their  liberty,  which  tho 
Government  contemplates  with  awful  reverence  and  would  approach  only  with  the  most  cautious 
circumspection,  there  is  no  one  of  which  the  importance  is  more  deeply  impressed  on  the  public 
mind  thau  the  liberty  of  the  press.  That  this  liberty  is  often  carried  to  excess  ;  that  it  biU 
sometimes  degenerated  into  licentiousness,  is  seen  and  lamented,  but  the  remedy  has  not  yet  been  dis- 
covered. Perhaps  it  is  anjxil  inseparable  from  the  good  with  which  it  is  alliei  ;  perhaps  it  is  a  shoot 
which  cannot  be  stripped  from  tliestalk  without  wounding  vitally  the  plant  from  ivhich  it  is  torn.  Hoic- 


512  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799. 

ever  desirable  those  measures  might  be  which  might  correct  without  enslaving  the  press,  they  have  never 
yet  been  devised  in  America.  No  regulations  exist  which  enable  the  Government  to  suppress  what- 
ever calumnies  or  invectives  any  individual  may  choose  to  offer  to  the  public  eye,  or  to  punish 
such  calumnies  and  invectives  otherwise  than  by  a  legal  prosecution  in  courts  which  arc  aliko 
open  to  all  who  cons-ider  themselves  as  injured." 

As  if  we  were  bound  to  look  for  security  from  the  personal  probity  of  Con- 
gress amidst  the  frailties  of  man,  and  not  from  the  barriers  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, it  lias  been  urged  that  the  accused  under  the  sedition  act  is  allowed  to 
prove  the  truth  of  the  charge.  This  argument  will  not  for  a  moment  disguise 
the  unconstitutionality  of  the  act,  if  it  be  recollected  that  opinions  as  well  as 
facts  are  made  punishable,  and  that  the  truth  of  an  opinion  is  not  susceptible 
of  proof.  By  subjecting  the  truth  of  opinion  to  the  regulation,  fine,  and  im- 
prisonment, to  be  inflicted  by  those  who  are  of  a  different  opinion,  the  free 
range  of  the  human  mind  is  injuriously  restrained.  The  sacred  obligations  of 
religion  flow  from  the  due  exercise  of  opinion,  in  the  solemn  discharge  of 
which  man  is  accountable  tolas  God  alone;  yet,  under  this  precedent  the 
truth  of  religion  itself  may  be  ascertained,  and  its  pretended  licentiousness 
punished  by  a  jury  of  a  different  creed  from  that  held  by  the  person  accused. 
This  law,  then,  commits  the  double  sacrilege  of  arresting  reason  in  her  progress 
towards  perfection,  and  of  placing  in  a  state  of  danger  the  free  exercise  of  re- 
ligious opinions.  But  where  does  the  Constitution  allow  Congress  to  create 
crimes  and  inflict  punishment,  provided  they  allow  the  accused  to  exhibit  evi- 
dence in  his  defence?  This  doctrine,  united  with  the  assertion,  that  sedition 
is  a  common  law  offence,  and  therefore  within  the  correcting  power  of  Con- 
gress, opens  at  once  the  hideous  volumes  of  penal  law,  and  turns  loose  upon 
us  the  utmost  invention  of  insatiable  malice  and  ambition,  which,  in  all  ages, 
have  debauched  morals,  depressed  liberty,  shackled  religion,  supported  des- 
potism, and  deluged  the  scaffold  with  blood. 

All  the  preceding  arguments,  arising  from  a  deficiency  of  constitutional 
power  in  Congress,  apply  to  the  alien  act;  and  this  act  is  liable  to  other  ob- 
jections peculiar  to  itself.  If  a  suspicion  that  aliens  are  dangerous  consti- 
tute the  justification  of  that  power  exercised  over  them  by  Congress,  then  a 
similar  suspicion  will  justify  the  exercise  of  a  similar  power  over  natives  ;  be- 
cause there  is  nothing  in  the  Constitution  distinguishing  between  the  power 
of  a  State  to  permit  the  residence  of  natives  and  of  aliens,  It  is,  therefore,  a 
right  originally  possessed,  and  never  surrendered,  by  the  respective  States, 
and  which  is  rendered  dear  and  valuable  to  Virginia,  because  it  is  assailed 
through  the  bosom  of  the  Constitution,  and  because  her  peculiar  situation 
renders  the  easy  admission  of  artisans  and  laborers  an  interest  of  vast  import- 
ance. 

But  this  bill  contains  other  features,  still  more  alarming  and  dangerous.  It 
dispenses  with  the  trial  by  jury ;  it  violates  the  judicial  system  ;  it  confounds 
legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  powers;  it  punishes  without  trial;  and  it 
bestows  upon  the  President  despotic  power  over  a  numerous  class  of  men. 


1799.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  513 

Are  such  measures  consistent  with  our  constitutional  principles?  And  will 
an  accumulation  of  power  so  extensive  in  the  hands  of  the  Executive,  over 
aliens,  secure  to  natives  the  blessings  of  republican  liberty? 

If  measures  can  mould  governments,  and  if  an  uncontrolled  power  of  con- 
struction is  surrendered  to  those  who  administer  them,  their  progress  may  be 
easily  foreseen,  and  their  end  easily  foretold.  A  lover  of  monarchy,  who  opens 
the  treasures  of  corruption  by  distributing  emolument  among  devoted  partisans, 
may  at  the  same  time  be  approaching  his  object  and  deluding  the  people  with 
professions  of  republicanism.  He  may  confound  monarchy  and  republicanism, 
by  the  art  of  definition.  He  may  varnish  over  the  dexterity  which  ambition 
never  fails  to  display,  with  the  pliancy  of  language,  the  seduction  of  expedi- 
ency, or  the  prejudices  of  the  times  ;  and  he  may  come  at  length  to  avow 
that  so  extensive  a  territory  as  that  of  the  United  States  can  only  be  governed 
by  the  energies  of  monarchy  ;  that  it  cannot  be  defended,  except  by  standing 
armies  ;  and  that  it  cannot  be  united  except  by  consolidation. 

Measures  have  already  been  adopted  which  may  lead  to  these  consequences. 
They  consist — 

In  fiscal  systems  and  arrangements,  which  keep  a  host  of  commercial  and 
wealthy  individuals  imbodied,  and  obedient  to  the  mandates  of  the  treasury. 

In  armies  and  navies,  which  will,  on  the  one  hand,  enlist  the  tendency  of 
man  to  pay  homage  to  his  fellow-creature  who  can  feed  or  honor  him  ;  and  on 
the  other,  employ  the  principle  of  fear,  by  punishing  imaginary  insurrections, 
under  the  pretext  of  preventive  justice. 

In  the  extensive  establishment  of  a  volunteer  militia,  rallied  together  by  a 
political  creed,  armed  and  officered  by  executive  power,  so  as  to  deprive  the 
States  of  their  constitutional  right  to  appoint  militia  officers,  and  to  place  the 
great  bulk  of  the  people  in  a  defenceless  situation. 

In  swarms  of  officers,  civil  and  military,  who  can  inculcate  political  tenets 
tending  to  consolidation  and  monarchy  both  by  indigencies  and  severities ; 
and  can  act  as  spies  over  the  free  exercise  of  human  reason. 

In  destroying,  by  the  sedition  act,  the  responsibility  of  public  servants  and 
public  measures  to  the  people,  thus  retrograding  towards  the  exploded  doctrine 
"  that  the  administrators  of  the  Government  are  the  masters,  and  not  the  ser- 
vants, of  the  people,"  and  exposing  America,  which  acquired  the  honour 
of  taking  the  lead  among  nations  towards  perfecting  political  principles,  to  the 
disgrace  of  returning  first  to  ancient  ignorance  and  barbarism. 

In  exercising  a  power  of  depriving  a  portion  of  the  people  of  that  repre- 
sentation in  Congress  bestowed  by  the  Constitution. 

In  the  adoration  and  efforts  of  some  known  to  be  rooted  in  enmity  to  Re- 
publican Government,  applauding  and  supporting  measures  by  every  contri- 
vance calculated  to  take  advantage  of  the  public  confidence,  which  is  allowed 
to  be  ingenious,  but  will  be  fatally  injurious. 

In  transferring  to  the  Executive  important  legislative  powers ;  particularly 
VOL    IV  33 


514  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799. 

the  power  of  raising  armies,  and  borrowing  money  without  limitation  of 
interest. 

In  restraining  the  freedom  of  the  press,  and  investing  the  Executive  with 
legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  powers,  over  a  numerous  body  of  men. 

And,  that  we  may  shorten  the  catalogue,  in  establishing,  by  successive  pre- 
cedents, such  a  mode  of  construing  the  Constitution  as  will  rapidly  remove 
every  restraint  upon  Federal  power. 

Let  history  be  consulted  ;  let  the  man  of  experience  reflect :  nay,  let  the  ar- 
tificers of  monarchy  be  asked  what  further  materials  they  can  need  for  build- 
ing up  their  favorite  system. 

These  are  solemn  but  painful  truths  ;  and  yet  we  recommend  it  to  you  not 
to  forget  the  possibility  of  danger  from  without,  although  danger  threatens  us 
from  within.  Usurpation  is  indeed  dreadful;  but  against  foreign  invasion,  if 
that  should  happen,  let  us  rise  with  hearts  and  hands  united,  and  repel  the 
attack  with  the  zeal  of  freemen  who  will  strengthen  their  title  to  examine  and 
correct  domestic  measures,  by  having  defended  their  country  against  foreign 
aggression. 

Pledged  as  we  are,  fellow-citizens,  to  these  sacred  engagements,  we  yet  hum- 
bly and  fervently  implore  the  Almighty  Disposer  of  events  to  avert  from  our 
land  war  and  usurpation,  the  scourges  of  mankind ;  to  permit  our  fields  to  be 
cultivated  in  peace  ;  to  instil  into  nations  the  love  of  friendly  intercourse  ;  to 
suffer  our  youth  to  be  educated  in  virtue,  and  to  preserve  our  morality  from 
the  pollution  invariably  incident  to  habits  of  war ;  to  prevent  the  laborer  and 
husbandman  from  being  harassed  by  taxes  and  imposts  ;  to  remove  from  am- 
bition the  means  of  disturbing  the  commonwealth ;  to  annihilate  all  pretexts 
for  power  afforded  by  war;  to  maintain  the  Constitution;  and  to  bless  our 
nation  with  tranquillity,  under  whose  benign  influeuce  we  may  reach  the  sum- 
mit of  happiness  and  glory,  to  which  we  are  destined  by  nature  and  nature's 
God. 

Attest:  JOHN  STEWART,  C.  H.  D. 

1799,  January  23d.     Agreed  to  by  the  Senate. 

H.  BROOKE,  C.  S. 

A  true  copy  from  the  "original  deposited  in  the  office  of  the  General 
Assembly. 

JOHN  STEWART,  Keeper  of  Rolls. 


REPORT  ON  THE  VIRGINIA  RESOLUTIONS. 


House  of  Delegates,  Session  of  1799-1800. 
Report  of  the  Committee  to  whom  were  referred  the  Communications  of  various 
States,  relative  to  the  Resolutions  of  the  last  General  Assembly  of  this  State, 
concerning  the  Alien  and  Sedition  Laws. 

Whatever  room  might  be  found  in  the  proceedings  of  some  of  the  States,  who 
have  disapproved  of  the  resolutions  of  the  General  Assembly  of  this  Common- 
wealth, passed  on  the  21st  day  of  December,  1798,  for  painful  remarks  on  the 
spirit  and  manner  of  those  proceedings,  it  appears  to  the  committee  most  con- 
sistent with  the  duty,  as  well  as  dignity,  of  the  General  Assembly,  to  hasten 
an  oblivion  of  every  circumstance  which  might  be  construed  into  a  diminu- 
tion of  mutual  respect,  confidence,  and  affection  among  the  members  of  the 
Union. 

The  committee  have  deemed  it  a  more  useful  task  to  revise,  with  a  critical 
eye,  the  resolutions  which  have  met  with  this  disapprobation ;  to  examine 
fully  the  several  objections  and  arguments  which  have  appeared  against  them  ; 
and  to  inquire  whether  there  be  any  errors  of  fact,  of  principle,  or  of  reason- 
ing, which  the  candor  of  the  General  Assembly  ought  to  acknowledge  and 
correct. 

The  first  of  the  resolutions  is  in  the  words  following: 

"Resolved.  That  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia  doth  unequivocally  express  a  firm  resolution 
to  maintain  and  defend  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and  the  Constitution  of  this  State  against 
every  aggression,  either  foreign  or  domestic,  and  that  they  will  support  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  in  all  measures  warranted  by  the  former." 

No  unfavorable  comment  can  have  been  made  on  the  sentiments  here  ex- 
pressed. To  maintain  and  defend  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and 
of  their  own  State,  against  every  aggression,  both  foreign  and  domestic,  and 
to  support  the  Government  of  the  United  States  in  all  measures  warranted  by 
their  Constitution,  are  duties  which  the  General  Assembly  ought  always  to 
feel,  and  to  which,  on  such  an  occasion,  it  was  evidently  proper  to  express 
their  sincere  and  firm  adherence. 

In  their  next  resolution — 

"The  General  Assembly  most  solemnly  declares  a  warm  attachment  to  the  Union  of  the  States, 
to  maintain  which  it  pledges  all  its  powers  ;  and  that  for  this  end  it  is  their  duty  to  watch  over 
and  oppose  every  infraction  of  those  principles  which  constitute  the  only  basis  of  that  Union,  be- 
cause a  faithful  observance  of  them  can  alone  secure  its  existence,  and  the  public  happiness." 

The  observation  just  made  is  equally  applicable  to  this  solemn  declaration 


51 G  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

of  warrr  attachment  to  the  Union,  and  this  solemn  pledge  to  maintain  it;  nor 
can  any  question  arise  among  enlightened  friends  of  the  Union,  as  to  the  duty 
of  watching  over  and  opposing  every  infraction  of  those  principles  which  con- 
stitute its  basis,  and  a  faithful  observance  of  which  can  alone  secure  its  ex- 
istence, and  the  public  happiness  thereon  depending. 
The  third  resolution  is  in  the  words  following: 

"That  this  Assembly  doth  explicitly  and  peremptorily  declare,  that  it  views  the  powers  of  the 
Federal  Government  as  resulting  from  the  compact  to  which  the  States  are  parties,  as  limited  by 
the  plain  sense  and  intention  of  the  instrument  constituting  that  compact — as  no  further  valid  than 
they  are  authorized  by  the  grants  enumerated  in  that  compact;  and  that  in  case  of  a  deliberate, 
palpable,  and  dangerous  exercise  of  other  powers,  not  granted  by  the  said  compact,  the  States  who 
are  parties  thereto  have  the  right  and  are  in  duty  bound  to  interpose  for  arresting  the  progress  of 
the  evil,  and  for  maintaining  within  their  respective  limits  the  authorities,  rights,  and  liberties  ap- 
pertaining to  them." 

On  this  resolution  the  committee  have  bestowed  all  the  attention  which  its 
importance  merits.  They  have  scanned  it  not  merely  with  a  strict,  but  with 
a  severe  eye;  and  they  feel  confidence  in  pronouncing  that,  in  its  just  and  fair 
construction,  it  is  unexceptionably  true  in  its  several  positions,  as  well  as  con- 
stitutional and  conclusive  in  its  inferences. 

The  resolution  declares,  first,  that  "it  views  the  powers  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment as  resulting  from  the  compact  to  which  the  States  are  parties;"  in 
other  words,  that  the  Federal  powers  are  derived  from  the  Constitution  ;  and 
that  the  Constitution  is  a.  compact  to  which  the  States  are  parties. 

Clear  as  the  position  must  seem,  that  the  Federal  powers  are  derived  from 
the  Constitution,  and  from  that  alone,  the  committee  are  not  unapprized  of  a 
late  doctrine  which  opens  another  source  of  Federal  powers  not  less  extensive 
and  important  than  it  is  new  and  unexpected.  The  examination  of  this  doc- 
trine will  be  most  conveniently  connected  with  a  review  of  a  succeeding  reso- 
lution. The  committee  satisfy  themselves  here  with  briefly  remarking,  that 
in  all  the  contemporary  discussions  and  comments  which  the  Constitution  un- 
derwent, it  was  constantly  justified  and  recommended  on  the  ground  thai  the 
powers  not  given  to  the  Government  were  withheld  from  it ;  and  that  if  any 
doubt  could  have  existed  on  this  subject,  under  the  original  text  of  the  Con- 
stitution, it  is  removed,  as  far  as  words  could  remove  it,  by  the  12th  amendment. 
now  a  part  of  the  Constitution,  which  expressly  declares  "  that  the  powers  not 
delegated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the 
States,  are  reserved  to  the  States  respectively,  or  to  the  people." 

The  other  position  involved  in  this  branch  of  the  resolution,  namely,  "that 
the  States  are  parties  to  the  Constitution"'  or  compact,  is,  in  the  judgment  of 
the  committee,  equally  free  from  objection.  It  is  indeed  true  that  the  term 
"States"  is  sometimes  used  in  a  vague  sense,  aud  sometimes  in  different 
senses,  according  to  the  subject  to  which  it  is  applied.  Thus,  it  sometimes 
means  the  separate  sections  of  territory  occupied  by  the  political  societies 
within  each ;  sometimes  the  particular  governments  established  by  those  socie- 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  517 

ties;  sometimes  those  societies  as  organized  into  liio.se  particular  governments  ; 
and,  lastly,  it  means  the  people  composing  those  political  societies,  in  their 
highest  sovereign  capacity.  Although  it  might  be  wished  that  the  perfection 
oflanguage  admitted  less  diversity  in  the  signification  of  the  same  words,  yet 
little  inconvenience  is  produced  by  it  where  the  true  sense  can  be  collected 
with  certainty  from  the  different  applications.  In  the  present  instance,  what- 
ever different  construction  of  the  term  "  States,"  in  the  resolution,  may  have 
been  entertained,  all  will  at  least  concur  in  that  last  mentioned;  because  in 
that  sense  the  Constitution  was  submitted  to  the  "States;"  in  that  sense  the 
"States"  ratified  it;  and  in  that  sense  of  the  term  "States"  they  are  conse- 
quently parties  to  the  compact  from  which  the  powers  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment result. 

The  next  position  is,  that  the  General  Assembly  views  the  powers  of  the 
Federal  Government  "as  limited  by  the  plain  sense  and  intention  of  the  in- 
strument constituting  that  compact,"  and  "  as  no  farther  valid  than  they  are  au- 
thorized by  the  grants  therein  enumerated."  It  does  not  seem  possible  that 
any  just  objection  can  lie  against  either  of  these  clauses.  The  first  amounts 
merely  to  a  declaration  that  the  compact  ought  to  have  the  interpretation 
plainly  intended  by  the  parties  to  it ;  the  other,  to  a  declaration  that  it  ought 
to  have  the  execution  and  effect  intended  by  them.  If  the  powers  granted  be 
valid,  it  is  solely  because  they  are  granted;  and  if  the  granted  powers  are  valid 
because  granted,  all  other  powers  not  granted  must  not  be  valid. 

The  resolution  having  taken  this  view  of  the  Federal  compact,  proceeds  to 
infer  "  that,  in  case  of  a  deliberate,  palpable,  and  dangerous  exercise  of  other 
powers,  not  granted  by  the  said  compact,  the  States  who  are  parties  thereto 
have  the  right  and  are  in  duty  bound  to  interpose  for  arresting  the  progress  of 
the  evil,  and  for  maintaining  within  their  respective  limits  the  authorities,  rights, 
and  liberties  appertaining  to  them." 

It  appears  to  your  committee  to  be  a  plain  principle,  founded  in  common 
sense,  illustrated  by  common  practice,  and  essential  to  the  nature  of  compacts, 
that  where  resort  can  be  had  to  no  tribunal  superior  to  the  authority  of  the 
parties,  the  parties  themselves  must  be  the  rightful  judges,  in  the  last  resort, 
whether  the  bargain  made  has  been  pursued  or  violated.  The  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  was  formed  by  the  sanction  of  the  States,  given  by  each  in 
its  sovereign  capacity.  It  adds  to  the  stability  and  dignity,  as  well  as  to  the 
authority  of  the  Constitution,  that  it  rests  on  this  legitimate  and  solid  founda- 
tion. The  States,  then,  being  the  parties  to  the  constitutional  compact,  and 
in  their  sovereign  capacity,  it  follows  of  necessity  that  there  can  be  no  tribunal 
above  their  authority  to  decide,  in  the  last  resort,  whether  the  compact  made 
oy  them  be  violated  ;  and,  consequently,  that,  as  the  parties  to  it,  they  must 
themselves  decide,  in  the  last  resort,  suoh  questions  as  may  be  of  sufficient 
magnitude  to  require  their  interposition. 


518  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

It  does  not  follow,  however,  because  the  States,  as  sovereign  parties  to 
their  constitutional  compact,  must  ultimately  decide  whether  it  has  been  vio- 
lated, that  such  a  decision  ought  to  bo  interposed  either  in  a  hasty  manner  or 
on  doubtful  and  inferior  occasions.  Even  in  the  case  of  ordinary  conventions 
between  different  nations,  where,  by  the  strict  rule  of  interpretation,  a  breach 
of  a  part  may  be  deemed  a  breach  of  the  whole — every  part  being  deemed  a 
condition  of  every  other  part,  and  of  the  whole — it  is  always  laid  down  that 
the  breach  must  be  both  wilful  and  material,  to  justify  an  application  of  the 
rule.  But  in  the  case  of  an  intimate  and  constitutional  union,  like  that  of  the 
United  States,  it  is  evident  that  the  interposition  of  the  jiarties,  in  their  sover. 
eign  capacity,  can  be  called  for  by  occasions  only  deeply  essentially  affecting 
the  vital  principles  of  their  political  system. 

The  resolution  has,  accordingly,  guarded  against  any  misapprehension  of 
its  object,  by  expressly  requiring  for  such  an  interposition  "the  case  of  a  de. 
liberate,  palpable,  and  dangerous  breach  of  the  Constitution  by  the  exercise 
of  powers  not  granted  by  it."  It  must  be  a  case,  not  of  a  light  and  transient 
nature,  but  of  a  nature  dangerous  to  the  great  purposes  for  which  the  Consti- 
tution was  established.  It  must  be  a  case,  moreover,  not  obscure  or  doubtful 
in  its  construction,  but  plain  and  palpable.  Lastly,  it  must  be  a  case  not  re- 
sulting from  a  partial  consideration  or  hasty  determination,  but  a  case  stamped 
with  a  final  consideration  and  deliberate  adherence.  It  is  not  necessary,  be- 
cause the  resolution  does  not  require,  that  the  question  should  be  discussed, 
how  far  the  exercise  of  any  particular  power,  ungranted  by  the  Constitution, 
would  justify  the  interposition  of  the  parties  to  it.  As  cases  might  easily  be 
stated  which  none  would  contend  ought  to  fall  within  that  description,  cases, 
on  the  other  hand,  might  with  equal  ease  be  stated,  so  flagrant  and  so  fatal  as 
to  unite  every  opinion  in  placing  them  within  the  description. 

But  the  resolution  has  done  more  than  guard  against  misconstruction,  by 
expressly  referring  to  cases  of  a  deliberate,  palpable,  and  dangerous  nature. 
It  specifies  the  object  of  the  interposition  which  it  contemplates  to  be  solely 
that  of  arresting  the  progress  of  the  evil  of  usurpation,  and  of  maintaining  the 
authorities,  rights,  and  liberties  appertaining  to  the  States  as  parties  to  the 
Constitution. 

From  this  view  of  the  resolution  it  would  seem  inconceivable  that  it  can 
incur  any  just  disapprobation  from  those  who,  laying  aside  all  momentary  im- 
pressions, and  recollecting  the  genuine  source  and  object  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution, shall  candidly  and  accurately  interpret  the  meaning  of  the  General 
Assembly.  If  the  deliberate  exercise  of  dangerous  powers,  palpably  withheld 
by  the  Constitution,  could  not  justify  the  parties  to  it  in  interposing  even  so 
far  as  to  arrest  the  progress  of  the  evil,  and  thereby  to  preserve  the  Constitu- 
tion itself,  as  well  as  to  provide  for  the  safety  of  the  parties  to  it,  there  would 
be  an  end  to  all  relief  from  usurped  power,  aud  a  direct  subversion  of  the  rights 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  519 

speciGed  or  recognised  under  all  the  State  constitutions,  as  well  as  a  plain 
denial  of  the  fundamental  principle  on  which  our  independence  itself  was 
declared. 

But  it  is  objected  that  the  judicial  authority  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  sole 
expositor  of  the  Constitution,  in  the  last  resort;  and  it  may  be  asked  for  what 
reason  the  declaration  by  the  General  Assembly,  supposing  it  to  be  theoreti- 
cally true,  could  be  required  at  the  present  day,  and  in  so  solemn  a  manner. 

On  this  objection  it  might  be  observed,  first,  that  there  may  be  instances 
of  usurped  power,  which  the  forms  of  the  Constitution  would  never  draw  within 
the  control  of  the  judicial  department;  secondly,  that  if  the  decision  of  the 
judiciary  be  raised  above  the  authority  of  the  sovereign  parties  to  the  Consti- 
tution, the  decisions  of  the  other  departments,  not  carried  by  the  forms  of  the 
Constitution  before  the  judiciary,  must  be  equally  authoritative  and  final  with 
the  decisions  of  that  department.  But  the  proper  answer  to  the  objection  is, 
that  the  resolution  of  the  General  Assembly  relates  to  those  great  and  extra- 
ordinary cases  in  which  all  the  forms  of  the  Constitution  may  prove  ineffectual 
against  infractions  dangerous  to  the  essential  rights  of  the  parties  to  it.  The 
resolution  supposes  that  dangerous  powers,  not  delegated,  may  not  only  be 
usurped  and  executed  by  the  other  departments,  but  that  the  judicial  depart- 
ment also  may  exercise  or  sanction  dangerous  powers  beyond  the  grant  of  the 
Constitution,  and,  consequently,  that  the  ultimate  right  of  the  parties  to  the 
Constitution  to  judge  whether  the  compact  has  been  dangerously  violated, 
must  extend  to  violations  by  one  delegated  authority  as  well  as  by  another;  by 
the  judiciary  as  well  as  by  the  executive  or  the  legislature. 

However  true,  therefore,  it  may  be  that  the  judicial  department  is,  in  all 
questions  submitted  to  it  by  the  forms  of  the  Constitution,  to  decide  in  the  last 
resort,  this  resort  must  necessarily  be  deemed  the  last  in  relation  to  the  au- 
thorities of  the  other  departments  of  the  Government;  not  in  relation  to  the 
rights  of  the  parties  to  the  constitutional  compact,  from  which  the  judicial 
as  well  as  the  other  departments  hold  their  delegated  trusts.  On  any  other 
hypothesis,  the  delegation  of  judicial  power  would  annul  the  authority  dele- 
gating it ;  and  the  concurrence  of  this  department  with  the  others  in  usurped 
powers  might  subvert  forever,  and  beyond  the  possible  reach  of  any  rightful 
remedy,  the  very  Constitution  which  all  were  instituted  to  preserve. 

The  truth  declared  in  the  resolution  being  established,  the  expediency  of 
making  the  declaration  at  the  present  day  may  safely  be  left  to  the  temperate 
consideration  and  candid  judgment  of  the  American  public.  It  will  be  re- 
membered that  a  frequent  recurrence  to  fundamental  principles  is  solemnly 
enjoined  by  most  of  the  State  constitutions,  and  particularly  by  our  own,  as  a 
necessary  safeguard  against  the  danger  of  degeneracy  to  which  republics  are 
liable,  as  well  as  other  governments,  though  in  a  less  degree  than  others.  And 
a  fair  comparison  of  the  political  doctrines  not  unfrequent  at  the  present  day 
with  those  which  characterized  the  epoch  of  our  Revolution,  and  which  form 


520  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

the  basis  of  our  republican  constitutions,  will  best  determine  whether  the  de- 
claratory recurrence  here  made  to  those  principles  ought  to  be  viewed  as  un- 
seasonable and  improper,  or  as  u  \  igilant  discharge  of  an  important  duty.  The 
authority  of  constitutions  over  governments,  and  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  peo- 
ple over  constitutions,  are  truths  « liich  are  at  all  times  necessary  to  be  kept  in 
mind,  and  at  no  time,  perhaps,  more  necessary  than  at  present. 
The  fourth  resolution  stands  as  follows : 

"  That  the  General  Assembly  doth  also  express  its  deep  regret  that  a  spirit  has  in  sundry  in- 
stances been  manifested  by  tbe  Federal  Government  to  enlarge  its  powers  by  forced  constructions 
of  the  constitutional  charter  which  defines  them  ;an<l  that  indications  have  appeared  of  a  design  to 

expound  certain  general  phrases,  (which,  having  been  copied  trom  the  very  limited  grant  of  pow- 
ers in  the  former  Articles  of  Confederation,  were  the  less  liable  to  be  misconstrued,)  so  as  to 
destroy  the  meaning  and  effect  of  the  particular  enumeration  which  necessarily  explains  and  limits 
the  general  phrases,  and  so  as  to  consolidate  the  States  by  degrees  into  one  sovereignty ,  tbe  obvious 
tendency  and  inevitable  result  of  which  would  be  to  transform  the  present  republican  system  of 
the  United  States  into  an  absolute,  or  at  best  a  mixed,  monarchy." 

The  first  question  here  to  be  considered  is,  whether  a  spirit  has,  in  sundry 
instances,  been  manifested  by  the  Federal  Government  to  enlarge  its  powers 
by  forced  constructions  of  the  constitutional  charter. 

The  General  Assembly  having  declared  their  opinion  merely  by  regrett'ng, 
in  general  terms,  that  forced  constructions  for  enlarging  the  Federal  powers 
have  taken  place,  it  does  not  appear  to  the  committee  necessary  to  go  into  a 
specification  of  every  instance  to  which  the  resolution  may  allude.  The  Alien 
and  Sedition  Acts  being  particularly  named  in  a  succeeding  resolution,  are 
of  course  to  be  understood  as  included  in  the  allusion.  Omitting  others  which 
have  less  occupied  public  attention,  or  been  less  extensively  regarded  as  un- 
constitutional, the  resolution  may  be  presumed  to  refer  particularly  to  the  Bank 
Law,  which,  from  the  circumstances  of  its  passage,  as  well  as  the  latitude  of 
construction  on  which  it  is  founded,  strikes  the  attention  with  singular  force; 
and  the  Carriage  Tax,  distinguished  also  by  circumstances  in  its  history  having 
a  similar  tendency.  Those  instances  alone,  if  resulting  from  forced  construc- 
tion, and  calculated  to  enlarge  the  powers  of  the  Federal  Government,  as  the 
committee  cannot  but  conceive  to  be  the  case,  sufficiently  warrant  this  part  of 
the  resolution.  The  committee  have  not  thought  it  incumbent  on  them  to  ex- 
tend their  attention  to  laws  which  have  been  objected  to,  rather  as  varying  the 
constitutional  distribution  of  powers  in  the  Federal  Government,  than  as  an 
absolute  enlargement  of  them  ;  because  instances  of  this  sort,  however  im- 
portant in  their  principles  aud  tendencies,  do  not  appear  to  fall  strictly  within 
the  text  under  review. 

The  other  questions  presenting  themselves  are — 1.  "Whether  indications  have 
appeared  of  a  design  to  expound  certain  general  phrases  copied  from  the 
"Articles  of  Confederation,"  so  as  to  destroy  the  effect  of  the  particular  enume- 
ration explaining  and  limiting  their  meaning.  2.  Whether  this  exposition 
would  by  degrees  consolidate  the  States  into  one  sovereignty.    3.  Whether  the 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  521 

tendency  and  result  of  this  consolidation  would  be  to  transform  the  republican 
system  of  the  United  States  into  a  monarchy. 

1.  The  general  phrases  here  meant,  must  be  those  "of  providing  for  the 
common  defence  and  general  welfare." 

In  the  "Articles  of  Confederation/'  the  phrases  are  used  as  follows,  in  Article 
VIII :  ''All  charges  of  war,  and  all  other  expenses  that  shall  be  incurred  for 
the  common  defence  and  general  welfare^  and  allowed  by  the  United  States  in 
Congress  assembled,  shall  be  defrayed  out  of  the  common  treasury,  which 
shall  be  supplied  by  the  several  States  in  proportion  to  the  value  of  all  land 
within  each  State,  granted  to  or  surveyed  for  any  person,  as  such  land  and  the 
buildings  and  improvements  thereon  shall  be  estimated,  according  to  such 
mode  as  the  United  States,  in  Congress  assembled,  shall  from  time  to  time 
direct  and  appoint." 

In  the  existing  Constitution  they  make  the  following  part  of  Section  8 :  "  The 
Congress  shall  have  power  to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts,  and  excises, 
to  pay  the  debts  and  provide  for  the  common  defence  and  general  welfare  of 
the  United  States." 

This  similarity  in  the  use  of  these  phrases,  in  the  two  great  Federal  charters, 
might  well  be  considered  as  rendering  their  meaning  less  liable  to  be  miscon- 
strued in  the  latter ;  because  it  will  scarcely  be  said  that  in  the  former  they 
were  ever  understood  to  be  either  a  general  grant  of  power,  or  to  authorize  the 
reepjisition  or  application  of  money  by  the  old  Congress  to  the  common  defence 
and  general  welfare,  except  in  the  cases  afterwards  enumerated,  which  ex- 
plained and  limited  their  meaning;  and  if  such  was  the  limited  meaning  at- 
tached to  these  phrases  in  the  very  instrument  revised  and  re-modeled  by  the 
present  Constitution,  it  can  never  be  supposed  that,  when  copied  into  this 
Constitution,  a  different  meaning  ought  to  be  attached  to  them. 

That,  notwithstanding  this  remarkable  security  against  misconstruction,  a 
design  has  been  indicated  to  expound  these  phrases  in  the  Constitution  so  as 
to  destroy  the  effect  of  the  particular  enumeration  of  powers  by  which  it  ex- 
plains and  limits  them,  must  have  fallen  under  the  observation  of  those  who 
have  attended  to  the  course  of  public  transactions.  Not  to  multiply  proofs  on 
this  subject,  it  will  suffice  to  refer  to  the  Debates  of  the  Federal  Legislature, 
in  which  arguments  have  on  different  occasions  been  drawn,  with  apparent 
effect,  from  these  phrases  in  their  indefinite  meaning. 

To  these  indications  might  be  added,  without  looking  further,  the  official  Re- 
port on  Manufactures,  by  the  late  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  made  on  the  5th 
of  December,  1791,  and  the  Report  of  a  Committee  of  Congress,  in  January, 
1797,  on  the  promotion  of  Agriculture.  In  the  first  of  these  it  is  expressly 
contended  to  belong  "  to  the  discretion  of  the  National  Legislature  to  pro- 
•'  nouuee  upon  the  objects  which  concern  the  general  welfare,  and  for  which, 
"  under  that  description,  an  appropriation  of  money  is  requisite  and  proper. 
*'  And  there  seems  to  be  no  room  for  a  doubt  that  whatever  concerns  the  general 


522  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

"interests  of  learning,  of  agriculture,  of  manufactures,  and  of  commerce, 
"are  within  the  sphere  of  the  National  Councils,  as  far  as  regards  an  applica- 
11  tion  of  money."  The  latter  Report  assumes  the  same  latitude  of  power  in 
the  national  councils,  and  applies  it  to  the  encouragement  of  agriculture  by 
means  of  a  society  to  be  established  at  the  seat  of  Government.  Although 
neither  of  these  Reports  may  have  received  the  sanction  of  a  law  carrying  it 
into  effect,  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  the  extraordinary  doctrine  contained  in  both 
has  passed  without  the  slightest  positive  mark  of  disapprobation  from  the 
authority  to  which  it  was  addressed. 

Now,  whether  the  phrases  in  question  be  construed  to  authorize  every  measure 
relating  to  the  common  defence  and  general  welfare,  as  contended  by  some — 
or  every  measure  only  in  which  there  might  be  an  application  of  money,  as 
suggested  by  the  caution  of  others — the  effect  must  substantially  be  the  same, 
in  destroying  the  import  and  force  of  the  particular  enumeration  of  powers 
which  follow  these  general  phrases  in  the  Constitution ;  for  it  is  evident  that 
there  is  not  a  single  power  whatever  which  may  not  have  some  reference  to 
the  common  defence  or  the  general  welfare;  nor  a  power  of  any  magnitude, 
which,  in  its  exercise,  does  not  involve  or  admit  an  application  of  money.  The 
government,  therefore,  which  possesses  power  in  either  one  or  other  of  these 
extents,  is  a  government  without  the  limitations  formed  by  a  particular  enume- 
ration of  powers;  and,  consequently,  the  meaning  and  effect  of  this  particular 
enumeration  is  destroyed  by  the  exposition  given  to  these  general  phr 

This  conclusion  will  not  be  affected  by  an  attempt  to  qualify  the  power  over 
the  "  general  welfare,"  by  referring  it  to  cases  where  the  general  icelfare  is 
beyon/1  the  reach  of  separate  provisions  by  the  individual  States,  and  leaving 
to  these  their  jurisdictions  in  cases  to  which  their  separate  provisions  may  be 
competent ;  for,  as  the  authority  of  the  individual  States  must  in  all  cases  be 
incompetent  to  general  regulations  operating  through  the  whole,  the  authority 
of  the  United  States  would  be  extended  to  every  object  relating  to  the  general 
welfare  which  might,  by  any  possibility,  be  provided  for  by  the  general  author- 
ity. This  qualifying  construction,  therefore,  would  have  little,  if  any,  tendency 
to  circumscribe  the  power  claimed  under  the  latitude  of  the  terms  u  general 
welfare." 

The  true  and  fair  construction  of  this  expression,  both  in  the  original  and 
existing  Federal  compacts,  appears  to  the  committee  too  obvious  to  be  mis- 
taken. In  both,  the  Congress  is  authorized  to  provide  money  for  the  common 
defence  and  general  loelfare.  In  both,  is  subjoined  to  this  authority  an  enume- 
ration of  the  cases  to  which  their  powers  shall  extend.  Money  cannot  be 
applied  to  the  general  welfare,  otherwise  than  by  an  application  of  it  to  some 
particular  measure  conducive  to  the  general  welfare.  Whenever,  therefore, 
money  has  been  raised  by  the  general  authority,  and  is  to  be  applied  to  a  par- 
ticular measure,  a  question  arises  whether  the  particular  measure  be  within 
the  enumerated  authorities  vested  in  Congress.     If  it  be,  the  money  requisite 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  523 

for  it  may  be  applied  to  it ;  if  it  be  not,  no  such  application  can  be  made. 
This  fair  and  obvious  interpretation  coincides  with  and  is  enforced  by  the 
clause  in  the  Constitution  which  declares  that  '■  no  money  shall  be  drawn  from 
the  Treasury,  but  in  consequence  of  appropriations  by  law."  An  appropria- 
tion of  money  to  the  general  welfare  would  be  deemed  rather  a  mockery  than 
an  observance  of  this  constitutional  injunction. 

2.  Whether  the  exposition  of  the  general  phrases  here  combatted  would  not 
by  degrees  consolidate  the  States  into  one  sovereignty,  is  a  question  concern- 
ing which  the  committee  can  perceive  little  room  for  difference  of  opinion. 
To  consolidate  the  States  into  one  sovereignty,  nothing  more  can  be  wanted 
than  to  supersede  their  respective  sovereignties  in  the  cases  reserved  to  them, 
by  extending  the  sovereignty  of  the  United  States  to  all  cases  of  the  "  general 
welfare" — that  is  to  say,  to  all  cases  whatever. 

3.  That  the  obvious  tendency  and  inevitable  result  of  a  consolidation  of  the 
States  into  one  sovereignty,  would  be  to  transform  the  republican  system  of 
the  United  States  into  a  monarchy,  is  a  point  which  seems  to  have  been  suffi- 
ciently decided  by  the  general  sentiment  of  America.  In  almost  every  instance 
of  discussion  relating  to  the  consolidation  in  question,  its  certain  tendency  to 
pave  the  way  to  monarchy  seems  not  to  have  been  contested.  The  prospect 
of  such  a  consolidation  has  formed  the  only  topic  of  controversy.  It  would  be 
unnecessary,  therefore,  for  the  committee  to  dwell  long  on  the  reasons  which 
support  the  position  of  the  General  Assembly.  It  may  not  be  improper,  how- 
ever, to  remark  two  consequences  evidently  flowing  from  an  extension  of  the 
Federal  powers  to  every  subject  falling  within  the  idea  of  the  u  general 
welfare." 

One  consequence  must  be,  to  enlarge  the  sphere  of  discretion  allotted  to  the 
Executive  Magistrate.  Even  within  the  legislative  limits  properly  defined  by 
the  Constitution,  the  difficulty  of  accommodating  legal  regulations  to  a  country 
so  great  in  extent  and  so  various  in  its  circumstances  has  been  much  felt, 
and  has  led  to  occasional  investments  of  power  in  the  Executive,  which  involve 
perhaps  as  large  a  portion  of  discretion  as  can  be  deemed  consistent  with  the 
nature  of  the  Executive  trust.  In  proportion  as  the  objects  of  legislative  care 
might  be  multiplied,  would  the  time  allowed  for  each  be  diminished,  and  the 
difficulty  of  providing  uniform  and  particular  regulations  for  all  be  increased. 
From  these  sources  would  necessarily  ensue  a  greater  latitude  to  the  agency 
of  that  department  which  is  always  in  existence,  and  which  could  best  mould 
regulations  of  a  general  nature  so  as  to  suit  them  to  the  diversity  of  particular 
situations.  And  it  is  in  this  latitude,  as  a  supplement  to  the  deficiency  of  the 
laws,  that  the  degree  of  Executive  prerogative  materially  consists. 

The  other  consequence  would  be,  that  of  an  excessive  augmentation  of  the 
offices,  honors,  and  emoluments,  depending  on  the  Executive  will.  Add  to 
the  present  legitimate  stock  all  those  of  every  description  which  a  consoli- 
dation of  the  States  would  take  from  them  and  turn  over  to  the  Federal  Gov- 


524  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

eminent,  and  the  patronage  of  the  Executive  would  necessarily  he  as  much 
swelled  in  this  case  as  its  prerogative  would  be  in  the  other. 

This  disproportionate  inerease  of  prerogative  and  patronage  must,  evidently, 
either  enable  the  Chief  Magistrate  of  the  Union,  by  quiet  means,  to  secure  his 
re-election  from  time  to  time,  and  finally  to  regulate  the  succession  as  he 
might  please  ;  or,  by  giving  so  transcendent  an  importance  to  the  office,  would 
render  the  elections  to  it  so  violent  and  corrupt,  that  the  public  voice  itself 
might  call  for  an  hereditary  in  place  of  an  elective  succession.  Whichever  of 
these  events  might  follow,  the  transformation  of  the  republican  system  of  the 
United  States  into  a  monarchy,  anticipated  by  the  General  Assembly  from  a 
consolidation  of  the  States  into  one  sovereignty,  would  be  equally  accomplished; 
and  whether  it  would  be  into  a  mixed  or  an  absolute  monarchy  might  depend 
on  too  many  contingencies  to  admit  of  any  certain  foresight. 

The  resolution  next  in  order  is  contained  in  the  following  terms  : 
"  That  the  General  Assembly  doth  particularly  protest  against  the  palpable  and  alarming  infrac- 
tions of  the  Constitution,  In  the  two  late  cases  of  the  'Alien  and  Sedition  Acts,'  passed  at  the  last 
session  of  Congress;  the  first  of  which  exercises  a  power  nowhere  delegated  to  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, and  which,  by  uniting  legislative  and  judicial  powers  to  those  of  executive,  subverts  the 
general  principles  of  a  free  Government,  as  well  as  the  particular  organization  and  positive  provis- 
ions of  the  Federal  Constitution;  and  the  other  of  which  acts  exercises,  in  like  manner,  a  power 
not  delegated  by  the  Constitution,  but, on  the  contrary,  expressly  and  positively  forbidden  by  one 
of  the  amendments  thereto;  a  power  which,  more  than  any  other,  ought  to  produce  universal 
alarm;  because  it  is  levelled  against  that  right  of  freely  examining  public  characters  and  meas- 
ures, and  of  free  communication  among  the  people  thereon,  which  has  ever  been  justly  deemed 
the  only  effectual  guardian  of  every  other  right." 

The  subject  of  this  resolution  having,  it  is  presumed,  more  particularly  led 
the  General  Assembly  into  the  proceedings  which  they  communicated  to  the 
other  States,  and  being  in  itself  of  peculiar  importance,  it  deserves  the  most 
critical  and  faithful  investigation,  for  the  length  of  which  no  other  apology 
will  be  necessary. 

The  subject  divides  itself  into— -jirst,  "  The  Alien  Act;"  secondly,  "The  Se- 
dition Act." 

Of  the  "  Alien  Act,"  it  is  affirmed  by  the  resolution — 1st.  That  it  exercises 
a  power  nowhere  delegated  to  the  Federal  Government.  2d.  That  it  unites 
legislative  and  judicial  powers  to  those  of  the  Executive.  3d.  That  this  union 
of  power  subverts  the  general  principles  of  free  government.  4th.  That  it 
subverts  the  particular  organization  and  positive  provisions  of  the  Federal 
Constitution. 

In  order  to  clear  the  way  for  a  correct  view  of  the  first  position  several  ob- 
servations will  be  premised. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  it  being  a  characteristic  fea- 
ture of  the  Federal  Constitution,  as  it  was  originally  ratified,  and  an  amend- 
ment thereto  having  precisely  declared,  "  That  the  powers  not  delegated  to  the 
United  States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States,  are  re- 
served to  the  States,  respectively,  or  to  the  people ; "  it  is  incumbent  iu  this, 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA     PROCEEDINGS.  525 

as  in  every  other  exercise  of  power  by  the  Federal  Government,  to  prove  from 
the  Constitution  that  it  grants  the  particular  power  exorcised. 

The  next  observation  to  be  made  is,  that  much  confusion  and  fallacy  have 
been  thrown  into  the  question  by  blending  the  two  cases  of  aliens,  members 
of  a  hostile  nation,  and  aliens,  members  of  friendly  nations.  These  two  eases 
are  so  obviously  and  so  essentially  distinct,  that  it  occasions  no  little  surprise 
that  the  distinction  should  have  been  disregarded  :  and  the  surprise  is  so  much 
the  greater,  as  it  appears  that  the  two  cases  are  actually  distinguished  by  two 
Beparate  acts  of  Congress,  passed  at  the  same  session,  and  comprised  in  the 
same  publication  ;  the  one  providing  for  the  case  of  "alien  enemies;"  the  other, 
"concerning  aliens"  indiscriminately,  and,  consequently,  extending  to  aliens 
of  every  nation  in  peace  and  amity  with  the  United  States.  With  respect  to 
alien  enemies,  no  doubt  has  been  intimated  as  to  the  Federal  authority  over 
them;  the  Constitution  having  expressly  delegated  to  Congress  the  power  to 
declare  war  against  any  nation,  and,  of  course,  to  treat  it  and  all  its  members 
as  enemies.  With  respect  to  aliens  who  are  not  enemies,  but  members  of  na- 
tions in  peace  and  amity  with  the  United  States,  the  power  assumed  by  the 
act  of  Congress  is  denied  to  be  constitutional;  and  it  is,  accordingly,  against 
this  act  that  the  protest  of  the  General  Assembly  is  expressly  and  exclusively 
directed. 

A  third  observation  is,  that  were  it  admitted,  as  is  contended,  that  the  "  act 
concerning  aliens  "  has  for  its  object,  not  a  penal,  but  a  preventive  justice,  it 
would  still  remain  to  be  proved  that  it  comes  within  the  constitutional  power 
of  the  Federal  Legislature;  and,  if  within  its  power,  that  the  Legislature  has 
exercised  it  in  a  constitutional  manner. 

In  the  administration  of  preventive  justice  the  following  principles  have 
been  held  sacred :  that  some  probable  ground  of  suspicion  be  exhibited  before 
some  judicial  authority;  that  it  be  supported  by  oath  or  affirmation;  that  the 
party  may  avoid  being  thrown  into  confinement  by  finding  pledges  or  sureties 
for  his  legal  conduct,  sufficient  in  the  judgment  of  some  judicial  authority; 
that  he  may  have  the  benefit  of  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  thus  obtain  his 
release  if  wrongfully  confined ;  and  that  he  may  at  any  time  be  discharged 
from  his  recognisance,  or  his  confinement,  and  restored  to  his  former  liberty 
and  rights  on  the  order  of  the  proper  judicial  authority,  if  it  shall  see  sufficient 
cause. 

All  these  principles  of  the  only  preventive  justice  known  to  American  juris- 
prudence are  violated  by  the  Alien  Act.  The  ground  of  suspicion  is  to  be 
judged  of,  not  by  any  judicial  authority,  but  by  the  Executive  Magistrate 
alone.  No  oath  or  affirmation  is  required.  If  the  suspicion  be  held  reason- 
able by  the  President,  he  may  order  the  suspected  alien  to  depart  the  ter- 
ritory of  the  United  States,  without  the  opportunity  of  avoiding  the  sentence 
by  finding  pledges  for  his  future  good  conduct.  As  the  President  may  limit 
the  time  of  departure  as  he  pleases,  the  benefit  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus 


52G  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

may  be  suspended  with  respect  to  the  party,  although  the  Constitution  ordain3 
that  it  shall  not  be  suspended  unless  when  the  public  safety  may  require  it,  in 
case  of  rebellion  or  invasion — neither  of  which  existed  at  the  passage  of  the 
act;  and  the  party  being,  under  the  sentence  of  the  President,  either  removed 
from  the  United  States,  or  being  punished  by  imprisonment,  or  disqualifica- 
tion ever  to  become  a  citizen,  on  conviction  of  not  obeying  the  order  of  re- 
moval, he  cannot  be  discharged  from  the  proceedings  against  him,  and  re- 
stored to  the  benefits  of  his  former  situation,  although  the  highest  judicial  au- 
thority should  see  the  most  sufficient  cause  for  it. 

But,  in  the  last  place,  it  can  never  be  admitted  that  the  removal  of  aliens, 
authorized  by  the  act,  is  to  be  considered,  not  as  punishment  for  an  offence, 
but  as  a  measure  of  precaution  and  prevention.  If  the  banishment  of  an 
alien  from  a  country  into  which  he  has  been  invited  as  the  asylum  most  aus- 
picious to  his  happiness — a  country  where  he  may  have  formed  the  most  ten- 
der connexions ;  where  he  may  have  invested  his  entire  property,  and  ac- 
quired property  of  the  real  and  permanent,  as  well  as  the  movable  and  tem- 
porary kind ;  where  he  enjoys,  under  the  laws,  a  greater  share  of  the  blessings 
of  personal  security,  and  personal  liberty,  than  he  can  elsewhere  hope  for,  and 
where  he  may  have  nearly  completed  his  probationary  title  to  citizenship;  if, 
moreover,  in  the  execution  of  the  sentence  against  him,  he  is  to  be  exposed, 
not  only  to  the  ordinary  dangers  of  the  sea,  but  to  the  peculiar,  casualties  in- 
cident to  a  crisis  of  war  and  of  unusual  licentiousness  on  that  element,  and 
possibly  to  vindictive  purposes  which  his  emigration  itself  may  have  provoked ; 
if  a  banishment  of  this  sort  be  uot  a  punishment,  and  among  the  severest  of 
punishments,  it  will  be  difficult  to  imagine  a  doom  to  which  the  name  can  be 
applied.  And  if  it  be  a  punishment,  it  will  remain  to  be  inquired  whether  it 
can  be  constitutionally  inflicted,  on  mere  suspicion,  by  the  single  will  of  the 
Executive  Magistrate,  on  persons  convicted  of  no  personal  offence  against  the 
laws  of  the  land,  nor  involved  in  any  offence  against  the  law  of  nations,  charged 
on  the  foreign  State  of  which  they  are  members. 

One  argument  offered  in  justification  of  this  power  exercised  over  aliens  is, 
that  the  admission  of  them  into  the  country  being  of  favor,  not  of  right,  the 
favor  is  at  all  times  revocable. 

To  this  argument  it  might  be  answered,  that,  allowing  the  truth  of  the  in- 
ference, it  would  be  no  proof  of  what  is  required.  A  question  would  still  oc- 
cur, whether  the  Constitution  had  vested  the  discretionary  power  of  admitting 
aliens  in  the  Federal  Government  or  in  the  State  governments. 

But  it  cannot  be  a  true  inference,  that,  because  the  admission  of  an  alien  is 
a  favor,  the  favor  may  be  revoked  at  pleasure.  A  grant  of  land  to  an  individ- 
ual may  be  of  favor,  not  of  right ;  but  the  moment  the  grant  is  made,  the  favor 
becomes  a  right,  and  must  be  forfeited  before  it  can  be  taken  away.  To  par- 
don a  malefactor  may  be  a  favor,  but  the  pardon  is  not,  on  that  account,  the 
less  irrevocable.     To  admit  an  alien  to  naturalization,  is  as  much  a  favor  as 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  527 

to  admit  him  to  reside  in  the  country;  yet  it  cannot  be  pretended  that  a  per- 
son naturalized  can  be  deprived  of  the  benefits  any  mure  than  a  native  citizen 
can  be  disfranchised. 

Again,  it  is  said,  that  aliens  not  being  parties  to  the  Constitution,  the  rights 
and  privileges  which  it  secures  cannot  be  at  all  claimed  by  thorn. 

To  this  reasoning,  also,  it  mighl  be  answered  that,  although  aliens  are  not 
parties  to  the  Constitution,  it  does  not  follow  that  the  Constitution  has  vested 
in  Congress  an  absolute  power  over  them.  The  parties  to  the  Constitution 
may  have  granted,  or  retained,  or  modified,  the  power  over  aliens,  without 
regard  to  that  particular  consideration. 

But  a  more  direct  reply  is,  that  it  does  not  follow,  because  aliens  are  not 
parties  to  the  Constitution,  as  citizens  are  parties  to  it,  that,  whilst  they  act- 
ually conform  to  it,  they  have  no  right  to  its  protection.  Aliens  are  not  more 
parties  to  the  laws  than  they  are  parties  to  the  Constitution ;  yet  it  will  not  be 
disputed  that,  as  they  owe,  on  one  hand,  a  temporary  obedience,  they  are  en- 
titled, in  return,  to  their  protection  and  advantage. 

If  aliens  had  no  rights  under  the  Constitution,  they  might  not  only  be  ban- 
ished, but  even  capitally  punished,  without  a  jury  or  the  other  incidents  to  a 
fair  trial.  But  so  far  has  a  contrary  principle  been  carried,  in  every  part  of 
the  United  States,  that,  except  on  charges  of  treason,  an  alien  has,  besides  all 
the  common  privileges,  the  special  one  of  being  tried  by  a  jury,  of  which  one- 
half  may  be  also  aliens. 

It  is  said  further,  that,  by  the  law  and  practice  of  nations,  aliens  may  be  re- 
moved, at  discretion,  for  offences  against  the  law  of  nations  ;  that  Congress  are 
authorized  to  define  and  punish  such  offences  ;  and  that  to  be  dangerous  to 
the  peace  of  society  is,  in  aliens,  one  of  those  offences. 

The  distinction  between  alien  enemies  and  alien  friends  is  a  clear  and  con- 
clusive answer  to  this  argument.  Alien  enemies  are  under  the  law  of  nations, 
and  liable  to  be  punished  for  offences  against  it.  Alien  friends,  except  in  the 
single  case  of  public  ministers,  are  under  the  municipal  law,  and  must  be  tried 
and  punished  according  to  that  law  only. 

This  argument  also,  by  referring  the  alien  act  to  the  power  of  Congress  to 
define  and  punish  offences  against  the  law  of  nations,  yields  the  point  that  the 
act  is  of  a  penal,  not  merely  of  a  preventive  operation.  It  must,  in  truth,  be 
so  considered.  And  if  it  be  a  penal  act,  the  punishment  it  inflicts  must  be 
justified  by  some  offence  that  deserves  it. 

Offences  for  which  aliens,  within  the  jurisdiction  of  a  country,  are  punisha- 
ble, are— first,  offences  committed  by  the  nation  of  which  they  make  a  part, 
and  in  whose  offences  they  are  involved ;  secondly,  offences  committed  by 
themselves  alone,  without  any  charge  against  the  nation  to  which  they  belong. 
The  first  is  the  case  of  alien  enemies  ;  the  second,  the  case  of  alien  friends.  In 
the  first  case,  the  offending  nation  can  no  otherwise  be  puuished  than  by  war, 
one  of  the  laws  of  which  authorizes  the  expulsion  of  such  of  its  members  as 


528  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

maybe  found  within  the  country  against  which  the  offence  has  been  committed. 
In  the  second  case — the  offence  being  committed  by  the  individual,  not  by  Ins 
nation,  and  against  the  municipal  law,  oof  against  the  law  of  nations — the  in- 
dividual only,  and  not  the  nation, is  punishable;  and  the  punishment  must  be 
conducted  according  to  the  municipal  law.  not  according  to  the  law  of  nations. 
Under  this  view  of  the  subject,  the  act  of  Congress  for  the  removal  of  alien 
enemies,  being  conformable  to  the  law  of  nations,  is  justified  by  the  Constitu 
tion;  and  the  "act"  for  the  removal  of  alien  friends,  being  repugnant  to  the 
constitutional  principles  of  municipal  law,  is  unjustifiable. 

Nor  is  the  act  of  Congress  for  the  removal  of  alien  friends  more  agreeable 
to  the  general  practice  of  nations  than  it  is  within  the  purview  of  the  law  of 
nations.  The  general  practice  of  nations  distinguishes  between  alien  friends 
and  alien  enemies.  The  latter  it  has  proceeded  against,  according  to  the  law 
of  nations,  by  expelling  them  as  enemies.  The  former  it  has  considered  as 
under  a  local  and  temporary  allegiance,  and  entitled  to  a  correspondent  pro- 
tection. If  contrary  instances  are  to  be  found  in  barbarous  countries,  under 
undefined  prerogatives,  or  amid  revolutionary  dangers,  they  will  not  be  deemed 
fit  precedents  for  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  even  if  not  beyond  its 
constitutional  authority. 

It  is  said  that  Congress  may  grant  letters  of  marque  and  reprisal ;  that  re- 
prisals may  be  made  on  persons  as  well  as  property ;  and  that  the  removal  of 
aliens  may  be  considered  as  the  exercise,  in  an  inferior  degree,  of  the  general 
power  of  reprisal  on  persons. 

Without  entering  minutely  into  a  question  that  does  not  seem  to  require  it, 
it  may  be  remarked  that  reprisal  is  a  seizure  of  foreign  persons  or  property, 
with  a  view  to  obtain  that  justice  for  injuries  done  by  one  State,  or  its  mem- 
bers, to  another  State,  or  its  members,  for  which  a  refusal  of  the  aggressors  re- 
quires such  a  resort  to  force  under  the  law  of  nations.  It  must  be  considered 
as  an  abuse  of  words  to  call  the  removal  of  persons  from  a  country  a  seizure 
or  reprisal  on  them  ;  nor  is  the  distinction  to  be  overlooked  between  reprisals 
on  persons  within  the  country  and  under  the  faith  of  its  laws,  aud  on  persons 
out  of  the  country.  But  laying  aside  these  considerations,  it  is  evidently  im- 
possible to  bring  the  alien  act  within  the  power  of  granting  reprisals,  since  it 
does  not  allege  or  imply  any  injury  received  from  any  particular  nation  for 
which  this  proceeding  against  its  members  was  intended  as  a  reparation.  The 
proceeding  is  authorized  against  aliens  of  every  nation;  of  nations  charged 
neither  with  any  similar  proceedings  agaiust  American  citizens,  nor  with  any 
injuries  for  which  justice  might  be  sought  in  the  mode  prescribed  by  the  act. 
Were  it  true,  therefore,  that  good  causes  existed  for  reprisals  against  one  or 
more  foreign  nations,  and  that  neither  the  persons  nor  property  of  its  members 
under  the  faith  of  our  laws  could  plead  an  exemption,  the  operation  of  the 
act  ought  to  have  been  limited  to  the  aliens  among  us  belonging  to  such  na- 
tions.  To  license  reprisals  against  all  nations  for  aggressions  charged  on  one 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  529 

only,  would  be  a  measure  as  contrary  to  every  principle  of  justice  and  public 
law  as  to  a  wise  policy,  and  the  universal  practice  of  nations. 

It  is  said  that  the  right  of  removing  aliens  is  an  incident  to  the  power  of 
war  rested  in  Congress  by  the  Constitution. 

This  is  a  former  argument  in  a  new  shape  only,  and  is  answered  by  repeat- 
ing, that  the  removal  of  alien  enemies  is  an  incident  to  the  power  of  war;  that 
the  removal  of  alien  friends  is  not  an  incident  to  the  power  of  war. 

It  is  said  that  Congress  are,  by  the  Constitution,  to  protect  each  State  against 
invasion  •  and  that  the  means  of  preventing  invasion  are  included  in  the  power 
of  protection  against  it. 

The  power  of  war,  in  general,  having  been  before  granted  by  the  Constitu- 
tion, this  clause  must  either  be  a  mere  specification  for  greater  caution  and 
certainty,  of  which  there  are  other  examples  in  the  instrument,  or  be  the  in- 
junction of  a  duty  superadded  to  a  grant  of  the  power.  Under  either  expla- 
nation it  cannot  enlarge  the  powers  of  Congress  on  the  subject.  The  power 
and  the  duty  to  protect  each  State  against  an  invading  enemy  would  be  the 
same  under  the  general  power,  if  this  regard  to  greater  caution  had  been 
omitted. 

Invasion  is  an  operation  of  war.  To  protect  against  invasion  is  an  exercise 
of  the  power  of  war.  A  power,  therefore,  not  incident  to  war  cannot  be  inci- 
dent to  a  particular  modification  of  war.  And  as  the  removal  of  alien  friends 
has  appeared  to  be  no  incident  to  a  general  state  of  war,  it  cannot  be  incident 
to  a  partial  state  or  a  particular  modification  of  war. 

Nor  can  it  ever  be  granted  that  a  power  to  act  on  a  case  when  it  actually 
occurs,  includes  a  power  over  all  the  means  that  may  tend  to  prevent  the  oc- 
currence of  the  case.  Such  a  latitude  of  construction  would  render  unavailing 
every  practical  definition  of  particular  and  limited  powers.  Under  the  idea 
of  preventing  war  in  general,  as  well  as  invasion  in  particular,  not  only  an  in- 
discriminate removal  of  all  aliens  might  be  enforced,  but  a  thousand  other 
things  still  more  remote  from  the  operations  and  precautions  appertenant  to 
war  might  take  place.  A  bigoted  or  tyrannical  nation  might  threaten  us  with 
war,  unless  certain  religious  or  political  regulations  were  adopted  by  us ;  yet 
it  never  could  be  inferred,  if  the  regulations  which  would  prevent  war  were 
such  as  Congress  had  otherwise  no  power  to  make,  that  the  power  to  make 
them  would  grow  out  of  the  purpose  they  were  to  answer.  Congress  have 
power  to  suppress  insurrections,  yet  it  would  not  be  allowed  to  follow  that  they 
might  employ  all  the  means  tending  to  prevent  them,  of  which  a  system  of 
moral  instruction  for  the  ignorant,  and  of  provident  support  for  the  poor,  might 
be  regarded  as  among  the  most  efficacious. 

One  argument  for  the  power  of  the  General  Government  to  remove  aliens 
would  have  been  passed  in  silence,  if  it  had  appeared  under  any  authority  in- 
ferior to  that  of  a  report  made  during  the  last  session  of  Congress  to  the  House 
of  Representatives  by  a  committee,  and  approved  by  the  House.  The  doctrine 

vol.  iv.  34 


530  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

on  which  this  argument  is  founded  is  of  so  neta  and  so  extraordinary  a  char- 
acter, and  strikes  so  radically  at  the  political  system  of  America,  that  it  is 
proper  to  state  it  in  the  very  words  of  the  report : 

"The  act  [concerninc  aliens]  is  said  to  be  uncom  titutional,  because  to  remove  aliens  is  a  direct 
breach  of  the  Constitution,  which  provides,  by  the  9th  section  of  the  1st  article,  that  the  migration 
or  importation  of  such  persons  as  any  of  the  States  shall  think  proper  to  admit,  shall  not  be  pro- 
hibited by  the  Congress  prior  to  the  year  1808." 

Among  the  answers  given  to  this  objection  to  the  constitutionality  of  the 
act,  the  following  very  remarkable  one  is  extracted: 

"  Thirdly,  that  as  the  Constitution  has  given  to  the  States  no  power  to  remove  aliens  during  the 
period  of  the  limitation  under  consideration,  in  the  m«an  time,  on  the  construction  assumed,  there 
would  be  no  authority  in  the  country  empowered  to  send  away  dangerous  aliens,  which  cannot  be 
admitted." 

The  reasoning  herensed  would  not  in  any  view  be  conclusive,  because  there 
are  powers  exercised  by  most  other  Governments,  which,  in  the  United  States, 
are  withheld  by  the  people,  both  from  the  General  Government  and  from  the 
State  governments.  Of  this  sort  are  many  of  the  powers  prohibited  by  the 
Declarations  of  Right  prefixed  to  the  constitutions,  or  by  the  clauses  in  the 
constitutions  in  the  nature  of  such  declarations.  Nay,  so  far  is  the  political 
system  of  the  United  States  distinguishable  from  that  of  other  countries,  by 
the  caution  with  which  powers  are  delegated  and  defined,  that  in  one  very  im- 
portant case,  even  of  commercial  regulation  and  revenue,  the  power  is  abso- 
lutely locked  up  against  the  hands  of  both  Governments.  A  tax  on  exports 
can  be  laid  by  no  constitutional  authority  whatever.  Under  a  system  thus 
peculiarly  guarded  there  could  surely  be  no  absurdity  in  supposing  that  alien 
friends,  who,  if  guilty  of  treasonable  machinations,  may  be  punished,  or  if  sus- 
pected on  probable  grounds,  may  be  secured  by  pledges  or  imprisonment,  in 
like  manner  with  permanent  citizens,  were  never  meant  to  be  subjected  to 
banishment  by  any  arbitrary  and  unusual  process,  either  under  the  one  Gov- 
ernment or  the  other. 

But  it  is  not  the  inconclusiveness  of  the  general  reasoning  in  this  passage 
which  chiefly  calls  the  attention  to  it.  It  is  the  principle  assumed  by  it,  that 
the  powers  held  by  the  States  are  given  to  them  by  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  ;  and  the  inference  from  this  principle,  that  the  powers  supposed 
to  be  necessary  which  are  not  so  given  to  the  State  governments,  must  reside 
in  the  Government  of  the  United  States. 

The  respect  which  is  felt  for  every  portion  of  the  constituted  authorities 
forbids  some  of  the  reflections  which  this  singular  paragraph  might  excite; 
and  they  are  the  more  readily  suppressed,  as  it  may  be  presumed,  with  justice 
perhaps  as  well  as  candor,  that  inadvertence  may  have  had  its  share  in  the 
error.  It  would  be  an  unjustifiable  delicacy,  nevertheless,  to  pass  by  so  por- 
tentous a  claim,  proceeding  from  so  high  an  authority,  without  a  monitory  no- 
tice of  the  fatal  tendencies  with  which  it  would  be  pregnant. 

Lastly,  it  is  said  that  a  law  on  the  same  subject  with  the  Alien  Act,  passed 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  53I 

by  this  State  originally  in  1785,  and  re-enacted  in  1792,  is  a  proof  that  a  sum- 
mary removal  of  suspected  aliens  was  not  heretofore  regarded  by  the  Virginia 
Legislature  as  liable  to  the  objections  now  urged  against  such  a  measure. 

This  charge  against  Virginia  vanishes  before  the  simple  remark,  that  the 
law  of  Virginia  relates  to  ''suspicious  persons,  being  the  subjects  of  any  for- 
eign power  or  State  who  shall  have  made  q  declaration  of  war,  or  actuallv 
commenced  hostilities,  or  from  whom  the  President  shall  apprehend  hostile  de- 
signs; "  whereas  the  act  of  Congress  relates  to  aliens,  being  the  subjects  of 
foreign  powers  and  States  who  have  neither  declared  war  nor  commenced 
hostilities,  nor  from  whom  hostile  designs  are  apprehended. 

2.  It  is  next  affirmed  of  the  Alien  Act,  that  it  unites  legislative,  judicial, 
and  executive  powers,  in  the  hands  of  the  President. 

However  difficult  it  may  be  to  mark  in  every  case  with  clearness  and  cer- 
tainty the  line  which  divides  legislative  power  from  the  other  departments  of 
power,  all  will  agree  that  the  powers  referred  to  these  departments  may  be  so 
general  and  undefined  as  to  be  of  a  legislative,  not  of  an  executive  or  judicial 
nature,  and  may  for  that  reason  be  unconstitutional.  Details,  to  a  certain  de- 
gree, are  essential  to  the  nature  and  character  of  a  law;  and  on  criminal  sub- 
jects, it  is  proper  that  details  should  leave  as  little  as  possible  to  the  discretion 
of  those  who  are  to  apply  and  execute  the  law.  If  nothing  more  were  re- 
quired, in  exercising  a  legislative  trust,  than  a  general  conveyance  of  author- 
ity— without  laying  down  any  precise  rules  by  which  the  authority  conveyed 
should  be  carried  into  effect — it  would  follow  that  the  whole  power  of  legisla- 
tion might  be  transferred  by  the  Legislature  from  itself,  and  proclamations 
might  become  substitutes  for  laws.  A  delegation  of  power  in  this  latitude 
would  not  be  denied  to  be  a  union  of  the  different  powers. 

To  determine,  then,  whether  the  appropriate  powers  of  the  distinct  depart- 
ments are  united  by  the  act  authorizing  the  Executive  to  remove  aliens,  it 
must  be  inquired  whether  it  contains  such  details,  definitions,  and  -rules,  as 
appertain  to  the  true  character  of  a  law ;  especially  a  law  by  which  personal 
liberty  is  invaded,  property  deprived  of  its  value  to  the  owner,  and  life  itself 
indirectly  exposed  to  danger. 

The  Alien  Act  declares  "  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  President  to  order 
all  such  aliens  as  he  shall  judge  dangerous  to  the  peace  and  safety  of  the 
United  States,  or  shall  have  reasonable  ground  to  suspect  are  concerned  in 
any  treasonable  or  secret  machinations  against  the  Government  thereof,  to 
depart,"  &c. 

Could  a  power  be  given  in  terms  less  definite,  less  particular,  and  less 
precise  ?  To  be  dangerous  to  the  public  safely— to  be  suspected  of  secret 
machinations  against  the  Government;  these  can  never  be  mistaken  for  legal 
rules  or  certain  definitions.  They  leave  everything  to  the  President.  His 
will  is  the  law. 

But  it  is  not  a  legislative  power  only  that  is  given  to  the  President.     He  is 


532  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

to  stand  ><i  the  place  of  the  judiciary  also.  His  suspicion  is  the  only  evi- 
dence which  is  to  convict*  his  order,  the  only  judgment  which  is  to  be  exe- 
cuted. 

Thus  it  is  the  President  whose  will  is  to  designate  the  offensive  conduct;  it 
is  his  will  that  is  to  ascertain  the  individuals  on  whom  it  is  charged ;  and  it  is 
his  will  that  is  to  cause  the  sentence  to  be  executed.  It  is  rightly  affirmed, 
therefore,  that  the  act  unites  legislative  and  judicial  powers  to  those  of  the 
executive. 

3.  It  is  affirmed  that  this  union  of  power  subverts  the  general  principles  of 
free  government. 

It  has  become  an  axiom  in  the  science  of  government,  that  a  separation 
of  the  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  departments  is  necessary  to  the 
preservation  of  public  liberty.  Nowhere  has  this  axiom  been  better  under- 
stood in  theory,  or  more  carefully  pursued  in  practice,  than  in  the  United 
States. 

4.  It  is  affirmed  that  such  a  union  of  power  subverts  the  particular  organ- 
ization and  positive  provisions  of  the  Federal  Constitution. 

According  to  the  particular  organization  of  the  Constitution,  its  legislative 
powers  are  vested  in  the  Congress,  its  executive  powers  in  the  President,  and 
its  judicial  powers  in  a  supreme  and  inferior  tribunals.  The  union  of  any 
two  of  these  powers,  and  still  more  of  all  three,  in  any  one  of  these  depart- 
ments, as  has  been  shown  to  be  done  by  the  Alien  Act,  must,  consequently, 
subvert  the  constitutional  organization  of  them. 

That  positive  provisions  in  the  Constitution,  securing  to  individuals  the 
benefits  of  fair  trial,  are  also  violated  by  the  union  of  powers  in  the  Alien  Act, 
necessarily  results  from  the  two  facts  that  the  Act  relates  to  alien  friends,  and 
that  alien  friends,  being  under  the  municipal  law  only,  arc  entitled  to  its  pro- 
tection. 

The  second  object  against  which  the  resolution  protests  is  the  Sedition  Art. 

Of  this  Act  it  is  affirmed :  1.  That  it  exercises  in  like  manner  a  power  not 
delegated  by  the  Constitution.  2.  That  the  power,  on  the  contrary,  is  expressly 
and  positively  forbidden  by  one  of  the  amendments  to  the  Constitution.  3. 
That  this  is  a  power  which  more  than  any  other  ought  to  produce  universal 
alarm,  because  it  is  levelled  against  that  right  of  freely  examining  public  char- 
acters and  measures,  and  of  free  communication  thereon,  which  has  ever  been 
justly  deemed  the  only  effectual  guardian  of  every  other  right. 

1.  That  it  exercises  a  power  not  delegated  by  the  Constitution. 

Here,  again,  it  will  be  proper  to  recollect  that  the  Federal  Government  being 
composed  of  powers  specifically  granted,  with  a  reservation  of  all  others  to  the 
States  or  to  the  people,  the  positive  authority  under  which  the  Sedition  Act 
could  be  passed  must  be  produced  by  those  who  assert  its  constitutionality. 
In  what  part  of  the  Constitution,  then,  is  this  authority  to  be  found  ? 

Several  attempts  have  been  made  to  answer  this  question,  which  will  be  ex- 


1799— 1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  533 

amined  iu  their  order.  The  committee  will  begin  with  one  which  has  filled 
them  with  equal  astonishment  and  apprehension,  and  which,  they  cannot  but 
persuade  themselves,  must  have  the  same  effect  on  all  who  will  consider  it  with 
coolness  and  impartiality,  and  with  a  reverence  for  our  Constitution  in  the  true 
character  in  which  it  issued  from  the  sovereign  authority  of  the  people.  The 
committee  refer  to  the  doctrine  lately  advanced,  as  a  sanction  to  the  Sedition 
Act,  "  that  the  common  or  unwritten  law,"  a  law  of  vast  extent  and  complexity, 
and  embracing  almost  every  possible  subject  of  legislation,  both  civil  and 
criminal,  makes  a  part  of  the  law  of  these  States,  in  their  united  and  national 
capacity. 

The  novelty,  and,  in  the  judgment  of  the  committee,  the  extravagance  of 
this  pretension,  would  have  consigned  it  to  the  silence  iu  which  they  have 
passed  by  other  arguments  which  an  extraordinary  zeal  for  the  Act  has  drawn 
into  the  discussion;  but  the  auspices  under  which  this  innovation  presents 
itself  have  constrained  the  committee  to  bestow  on  it  an  attention  which  other 
considerations  might  have  forbidden. 

In  executing  the  task,  it  may  be  of  use  to  look  back  to  the  colonial  state  of 
this  country,  prior  to  the  Revolution ;  to  trace  the  effect  of  the  Revolution 
which  converted  the  Colonies  into  independent  States;  to  inquire  into  the  im- 
port of  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  the  first  instrument  by  which  the  Union 
of  the  States  was  regularly  established;  and,  finally,  to  consult  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1787,  which  is  the  oracle  that  must  decide  the  important  question. 

In  the  state  prior  to  the  Revolution,  it  is  certain  that  the  common  law,  under 
different  limitations,  made  a  part  of  the  colonial  codes.  But  whether  it  be 
understood  that  the  original  colonists  brought  the  law  with  them,  or  made  it 
their  law  by  adoption,  it  is  equally  certain  that  it  was  the  separate  law  of  each 
colony  within  its  respective  limits,  and  was  unknown  to  them  as  a  law  perva- 
ding and  operating  through  the  whole  as  one  society. 

It  could  not  possibly  be  otherwise.  The  common  law  was  not  the  same  in 
any  two  of  the  Colonies;  in  some  the  modifications  were  materially  and  exten- 
sively different.  There  was  no  common  legislature  by  which  a  common  will 
could  be  expressed  in  the  form  of  a  law ;  nor  any  common  magistracy  by  which 
such  a  law  could  be  carried  into  practice.  The  will  of  each  colony,  alone  and 
separately,  had  its  organs  for  these  purposes. 

This  stage  of  our  political  history  furnishes  no  foothold  for  the  patrons  of 
this  new  doctrine. 

Did,  then,  the  principle  or  operation  of  the  great  event  which  made  the 
Colonies  independent  States  imply  or  introduce  the  common  law  as  a  law  of 
the  Union? 

The  fundamental  principle  of  the  Revolution  was,  that  the  Colonies  were 
co-ordinate  members  with  each  other  and  with  Great  Britain,  of  an  empire 
united  by  a  common  executive  sovereign,  but  not  united  by  any  common  legis- 
lative sovereign.     The  legislative  power  was  maintained  to  be  as  complete  in 


53-^  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

each  American  Parliament,  as  in  the  British  Parliament.  And  the  royal  pre- 
rogative was  in  force  in  each  Colony  by  virtue  of  its  acknowledging  the  King 
for  its  executive  magistrate,  as  it  was  in  Great  Britain  by  virtue  of  a  like 
acknowledgment  there.  A  denial  of  these  principles  by  Great  Britain,  and 
the  assertion  of  them  by  America,  produced  the.  Revolution. 

There  was  a  time,  indeed,  when  an  exception  to  the  legislative  separation 
of  the  several  component  and  co-equal  parts  of  the  empire  obtained  a  degree 
of  acquiescence.  The  British  Parliament  was  allowed  to  regulate  the  trade 
with  foreign  nations,  and  between  the  different  parts  of  the  empire.  This  was, 
however,  mere  practice  without  right,  and  contrary  to  the  true  theory  of  the 
Constitution.  The  convenience  of  some  regulations,  in  both  cases,  was  appa- 
rent ;  and  as  there  was  no  legislature  with  power  over  the  whole,  nor  any  con- 
stitutional pre-eminence  among  the  legislatures  of  the  several  parts,  it  was 
natural  for  the  legislature  of  that  particular  part  which  was  the  eldest  and  the 
largest  to  assume  this  function,  and  for  the  others  to  acquiesce  in  it.  This 
tacit  arrangement  was  the  less  criticised,  as  the  regulations  established  by  the 
British  Parliament  operated  in  favour  of  that  part  of  the  empire  which  seemed 
to  bear  the  principal  share  of  the  public  burdens,  and  were  regarded  as  an  in- 
demnification of  its  advances  for  the  other  parts.  As  long  as  this  regulating 
power  was  confined  to  the  two  objects  of  conveniency  and  equity,  it  was  not 
complained  of  nor  much  inquired  into.  But,  no  sooner  was  it  perverted  to  the 
selfish  views  of  the  party  assuming  it,  than  the  injured  parties  began  to  feel 
and  to  reflect;  and  the  moment  the  claim  to  a  direct  and  indefinite  power  was 
ingrafted  on  the  precedent  of  the  regulating  power,  the  whole  charm  was  dis- 
solved, and  every  eye  opened  to  the  usurpation.  The  assertion  by  Great 
Britain  of  a  power  to  make  laws  for  the  other  members  of  the  empire  in  all 
cases  whatsoever,  ended  in  the  discovery  that  she  had  a  right  to  make  laws  for 
them  in  no  cases  ivhatsoever. 

Such  beinf  the  ground  of  our  Revolution,  no  support,  nor  colour  can  be 
drawn  from  it  for  the  doctrine  that  the  common  law  is  binding  on  these  States 
as  one  society.  The  doctrine,  on  the  contrary,  is  evidently  repugnant  to  the 
fundamental  principle  of  the  Revolution. 

The  Articles  of  Confederation  are  the  next  source  of  information  on  this 
subject. 

In  the  interval  between  the  commencement  of  the  Revolution  and  the  final 
ratification  of  these  Articles,  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  Union  was  deter- 
mined by  the  circumstances  of  the  crisis,  rather  than  by  any  accurate  delinea- 
tion of  the  general  authority.  It  will  not  be  alleged  that  the  "common  law" 
could  have  had  any  legitimate  birth  as  a  law  of  the  United  States  during  that 
state  of  things.  If  it  came  as  such  into  existence  at  all,  the  Charter  of  Con- 
federation must  have  been  its  parent. 

Here  again,  however,  its  pretensions  are  absolutely  destitute  of  foundation. 
This  instrument  does  not  contain  a  sentence  or  a  syllable  that  can  be  tortured 


1799-1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  535 

into  a  countenance  of  the  idea  that  the  parties  to  it  were,  with  respect  to  tho 
objects  of  the  common  law,  to  form  one  community.  No  such  law  is  named, 
or  implied,  or  alluded  to,  as  being  in  force,  or  as  brought  into  force  by  that 
compact.  No  provision  is  made  by  which  such  a  law  could  be  carried  into 
operation ;  whilst,  on  the  other  hand,  every  such  inference  or  pretext  is  abso- 
lutely precluded  by  Article  II,  which  declares  "that  each  State  retains  its  sov- 
ereignty, freedom,  and  independence,  and  every  power,  jurisdiction,  and  right 
which  is  not  by  this  Confederation  expressly  delegated  to  the  United  States 
io  Congress  assembled." 

Thus  far  it  appears  that  not  a  vestige  of  this  extraordinary  doctrine  can  be 
found  in  the  origin  or  progress  of  American  institutions.  The  evidence  against 
it  has,  on  the  contrary,  grown  stronger  at  every  step,  till  it  has  amounted  to  a 
formal  and  positive  exclusion,  by  written  articles  of  compact  among  the  parties 
concerned. 

Is  this  exclusion  revoked,  and  the  common  law  introduced  as  national  law 
by  the  present  Constitution  of  the  United  States  ?  This  is  the  final  question 
to  be  examined. 

It  is  readily  admitted  that  particular  parts  of  the  common  law  may  have  a 
sanction  from  the  Constitution,  so  far  as  they  are  necessarily  comprehended  in 
the  technical  phrases  which  express  the  powers  delegated  to  the  Government; 
and  so  far  also  as  such  other  parts  may  be  adopted  by  Congress  as  necessary 
and  proper  for  carrying  into  execution  the  powers  expressly  delegated.  But 
the  question  does  not  relate  to  either  of  these  portions  of  the  common  law.  It 
relates  to  the  common  law  beyond  these  limitations. 

The  only  part  of  the  Constitution  which  seems  to  have  been  relied  on  in  this 
case  is  the  2d  section  of  Article  III :  "  The  judicial  power  shall  extend  to  all 
cases  in  law  and  equity  arising  under  this  Constitution,  the  laws  of  the  United 
States,  and  treaties  made  or  which  shall  be  made  under  their  authority." 

It  has  been  asked,  what  cases,  distinct  from  those  arising  under  the  laws  and 
treaties  of  the  United  States,  can  arise  under  the  Constitution,  other  than  those 
arising  under  the  common  law?  and  it  is  inferred  that  the  common  law  is 
accordingly  adopted  or  recognised  by  the  Constitution. 

Never,  perhaps,  was  so  broad  a  construction  applied  to  a  text  so  clearly 
unsusceptible  of  it.  If  any  colour  for  the  inference  could  be  found,  it  must 
be  in  the  impossibility  of  finding  any  other  cases  in  law  and  equity,  within  the 
provisions  of  the  Constitution,  to  satisfy  the  expression  ;  and  rather  than  resort 
to  a  construction  affecting  so  essentially  the  whole  character  of  the  Government, 
it  would  perhaps  be  more  rational  to  consider  the  expression  as  a  mere  pleo- 
nasm or  inadvertence.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  decide  on  such  a  dilemma. 
The  expression  is  fully  satisfied  and  its  accuracy  justified  by  two  descriptions 
of  cases  to  which  the  judicial  authority  is  extended,  and  neither  of  which  implies 
that  the  common  law  is  the  law  of  the  United  States.     One  of  these  descrip 


53G  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

tions  comprehends  the  eases  growing  out  uf  the  restrictions  on  the  legislature 
power  of  the  States.  For  example,  it  is  provided  that  "no  State  shall  emit 
bills  of  credit,"  or  "make  any  tiling  but  gold  and  silver  coin  a  tender  in  pay- 
ment of  debts."    Should  this  prohibition  be  violated,  and  a  auil  between  citizens 

of  the  same  State  be  the  consequence,  this  would  be  a  case  arising  under  the 
Constitution  before  the  judicial  power  of  the  United  States.  A  second  descrip- 
tion comprehends  suits  between  citizens  and  foreigners,  of  citizens  of  different 

States,  to  be  decided  according  to  the  State  or  foreign  laws,  but  submitted  by 
the  Constitution  to  the  judicial  power  of  the  United  States,  the  judicial  power 
being  in  several  instances  extended  beyond  the  legislative  power  of  the  United 
States. 

To  this  explanation  of  the  text  the  following  observations  may  be  added: 

The  expression  "cases  in  law  and  equity"  is  manifestly  confined  to  cases 
of  a  civil  nature,  and  would  exclude  cases  of  criminal  jurisdiction.  Criminal 
cases  in  law  and  equity  would  be  a  language  unknown  to  the  law. 

The  succeeding  paragraph  of  the  same  section  is  in  harmony  with  this  con- 
struction. It  is  in  these  words :  "  In  all  cases  affecting  ambassadors,  or  other 
public  ministers,  and  consuls,  and  those  in  which  a  State  shall  be  a  party,  the 
Supreme  Court  shall  have  original  jurisdiction.  In  all  the  other  cases  (in- 
cluding cases  of  law  and  equity  arising  under  the  Constitution)  the  Supreme 
Court  shall  have  appellate  jurisdiction  both  as  to  law  and  fad;  with  such  ex- 
ceptions and  under  such  regulations  as  Congress  shall  make." 

This  paragraph,  by  expressly  giving  an  appellate  jurisdiction  in  cases 
of  law  and  equity  arising  under  the  Constitution,  to  fact  as  well  as  to  law, 
clearly  excludes  criminal  cases  where  the  trial  by  jury  is  secured,  because  the 
fact  in  such  cases  is  not  a  subject  of  appeal.  And,  although  the  appeal  is 
liable  to  such  exceptions  and  regulations  as  Congress  may  adopt,  yet  it  is  not 
to  be  supposed  that  an  exception  of  all  criminal  cases  could  be  contemplated, 
as  well  because  a  discretion  in  Congress  to  make  or  omit  the  exception  would 
be  improper,  as  because  it  would  have  been  uuuecessary.  The  exception 
could  as  easily  have  been  made  by  the  Constitution  itself,  as  referred  to  the 
Congress. 

Once  more:  the  amendment  last  added  to  the  Constitution  deserves  atten- 
tion as  throwing  light  on  this  subject.  "The  judicial  power  of  the  United 
States  shall  not  be  construed  to  extend  to  any  suit  in  laio  or  equity  commenced 
or  prosecuted  against  one  of  the  United  States  by  citizens  of  another  State,  or 
by  citizens  or  subjects  of  any  foreign  power."  As  it  will  not  be  pretended  that 
any  criminal  proceeding  could  take  place  against  a  State,  the  terms  law  or 
equity  must  be  understood  as  appropriate  to  civil  in  exclusion  of  criminal 
cases. 

From  these  considerations  it  is  evident  that  this  part  of  the  Constitution, 
even  if  it  could  be  applied  at  all  to  the  purpose  for  which  it  has  been  cited, 


17'JO— 1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  537 

would  not  include  any  cases  whatever  of  a  criminal  nature,  and  consequently 
would  not  authorize  the  inference  from  it  that  the  judicial  authority  extends 
to  offences  against  the  common  law  as  offences  arising  under  the  Constitution. 

It  is  further  to  be  considered  that,  even  if  this  part  of  the  Constitution  could 
be  strained  into  an  application  to  every  common-law  case,  criminal  as  well  a3 
civil,  it  could  have  no  effect  in  justifying  the  Sedition  Act;  which  is  an  exercise 
of  legislative  and  nol  of  judicial  power:  and  it  is  the  judicial  power  only  of 
which  the  extent  is  defined  in  this  part  of  the  Constitution. 

There  arc  two  passages  in  the  Constitution  in  which  a  description  of  the  law 
of  the  United  States  is  found.  The  first  is  contained  in  Article  III,  Section  2, 
in  the  words  following:  "This  Constitution,  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  and 
treaties  made  or  which  shall  be  made  under  their  authority."'  The  second  is 
contained  in  the  second  paragraph  of  Article  VI,  as  follows:  "  This  Constitution 
and  the  laws  of  the  United  States  which  shall  be  made  in  pursuance  thereof 
and  all  treaties  made,  or  which  shall  be  made,  under  the  authority  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  shall  be  the  supreme  law  of  the  land."  The  first  of  these  descrip- 
tions was  meant  as  a  guide  to  the  judges  of  the  United  States  ;  the  second,  as 
a  guide  to  the  judges  of  the  several  States.  Both  of  them  consist  of  an  enu- 
meration which  was  evidently  meant  to  be  precise  and  complete.  If  the  com- 
mon law  had  been  understood  to  be  a  law  of  the  United  States,  it  is  not  possi- 
ble to  assign  a  satisfactory  reason  why  it  was  not  expressed  in  the  enumera- 
tion. 

In  aid  of  these  objections  the  difficulties  and  confusion  inseparable  from  a 
constructive  introduction  of  the  common  law  would  afford  powerful  reasons 
against  it. 

Is  it  to  be  the  common  law  with  or  without  the  British  statutes  ? 

If  without  the  statutory  amendments,  the  vices  of  the  code  would  be  insup- 
portable. 

If  with  these  amendments,  what  period  is  to  be  fixed  for  limiting  the  British 
authority  over  our  laws? 

Is  it  to  be  the  date  of  the  eldest  or  the  youngest  of  the  Colonies  ? 

Or  are  the  dates  to  be  thrown  together  and  a  medium  deduced? 

Or  is  our  independence  to  be  taken  for  the  date  ? 

Is,  again,  regard  to  be  had  to  the  various  changes  in  the  common  law  made 
by  the  local  codes  of  America  ? 

Is  regard  to  be  had  to  such  changes,  subsequent  as  well  as  prior  to  the 
establishment  of  the  Constitution  ? 

Is  regard  to  be  had  to  future  as  well  as  past  changes  ? 

Is  the  law  to  be  different  in  every  State  as  differently  modified  by  its  code, 
or  are  the  modifications  of  any  particular  State  to  be  applied  to  all  ? 

And,  on  the  latter  supposition,  which,  among  the  State  codes,  would  form 
the  standard? 


538  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

Questions  of  this  sort  might  be  multiplied  with  as  much  ease  as  there  would 
be  difficulty  in  answering  them. 

The  consequences  flowing  from  the  proposed  construction  furnish  other  ob- 
jections equally  conclusive,  unless  the  text  were  peremptory  in  its  meaning 
and  consistent  with  other  parts  of  the  instrument. 

These  consequences  may  be  in  relation  to  the  legislative  authority  of  the 
United  States ;  to  the  executive  authority ;  to  the  judicial  authority;  and  to 
the  governments  of  the  several  States. 

If  it  be  understood  that  the  common  law  is  established  by  the  Constitution, 
it  follows  that  no  part  of  the  law  can  be  altered  by  the  Legislature ;  such  of 
the  statutes  already  passed  as  may  be  repugnant  thereto  would  be  nullified, 
particularly  the  Sedition  Act  itself,  which  boasts  of  being  a  melioration  of 
the  common  law ;  and  the  whole  code,  with  all  its  incongruities,  barbarisms, 
and  bloody  maxims,  would  be  inviolably  saddled  on  the  good  people  of  the 
United  States. 

Should  this  consequence  be  rejected  and  the  common  law  be  held,  like  other 
laws,  liable  to  revision  and  alteration  by  the  authority  of  Congress,  it  then  fol- 
lows that  the  authority  of  Congress  is  co-extensive  with  the  objects  of  common 
law — that  is  to  say,  with  every  object  of  legislation  ;  for  to  every  such  object 
does  some  branch  or  other  of  the  common  law  extend.  The  authority  of  Con- 
gress would  therefore  be  no  longer  under  the  limitations  marked  out  in  the 
Constitution.     They  would  be  authorized  to  legislate  in  all  cases  whatsoever. 

In  the  next  place,  as  the  President  possesses  the  executive  powers  of  the 
Constitution,  and  is  to  see  that  the  laws  be  faithfully  executed,  his  authority 
also  must  be  co-extensive  with  every  branch  of  the  common  law.  The  addi- 
tions which  this  would  make  to  his  power,  though  not  readily  to  be  estimated, 
claim  the  most  serious  attention. 

This  is  not  all ;  it  will  merit  the  most  profound  consideration,  how  far  an 
indefinite  admission  of  the  common  law,  with  a  latitude  in  construing  it,  equal 
to  the  construction  by  which  it  is  deduced  from  the  Constitution,  might  draw 
after  it  the  various  prerogatives  making  part  of  the  unwritten  law  of  England. 
The  English  Constitution  itself  is  nothing  more  than  a  composition  of  unwrit- 
ten laws  and  maxims. 

In  the  third  place,  whether  the  common  law  be  admitted  as  of  legal  or  of 
constitutional  obligation,  it  would  confer  on  the  judicial  department  a  discre- 
tion little  short  of  a  legislative  power. 

On  the  supposition  of  its  having  a  constitutional  obligation,  this  power  in 
the  judges  would  be  permanent  and  irremediable  by  the  Legislature.  On  the 
other  supposition  the  power  would  not  expire  until  the  Legislature  should  have 
introduced  a  full  system  of  statutory  provisions.  Let  it  be  observed,  too,  that 
besides  all  the  uncertainties  above  enumerated,  aud  which  present  an  im- 
mense field  for  judicial  discretion,  it  would  remain  with  the  same  department 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  539 

to  decide  what  parts  of  the  common  law  would,  and  what  would  not,  be  prop- 
erly applicable  to  the  circumstances  of  the  United  States. 

A  discretion  of  this  sort  has  always  been  lamented  as  incongruous  and  dan- 
gerous, even  in  the  Colonial  and  State  courts,  although  so  much  narrowed  by 
positive  provisions  in  the  local  codes  on  all  the  principal  subjects  embraced 
by  the  common  law.  Under  the  United  States,  where  so  few  laws  exist  on 
those  subjects,  and  where  so  great  a  lapse  of  time  must  happen  before  the  vast 
chasm  could  be  supplied,  it  is  manifest  that  the  power  of  the  judges  over  the 
law  would,  in  fact,  erect  them  into  legislators,  and  that  for  a  long  time  it  would 
be  impossible  for  the  citizens  to  conjecture,  either  what  was  or  would  be  law. 
In  the  last  place,  the  consequence  of  admitting  the  common  law  as  the 
law  of  the  United  States,  on  the  authority  of  the  individual  States,  is  as  obvious 
as  it  would  be  fatal.  As  this  law  relates  to  every  subject  of  legislation,  and 
would  be  paramount  to  the  Constitutions  and  laws  of  the  States,  the  admission 
of  it  would  overwhelm  the  residuary  sovereignty  of  the  States,  and  by  one  con- 
structive operation  new  model  the  whole  political  fabric  of  the  country. 

From  the  review  thus  taken  of  the  situation  of  the  American  colonies  prior 
to  their  independence  ;  of  the  effect  of  this  event  on  their  situation  ;  of  the  na- 
ture and  import  of  the  Articles  of  Confederation ;  of  the  true  meaning  of  the 
passage  in  the  existing  Constitution  from  which  the  common  law  has  been  de- 
duced ;  of  the  difficulties  and  uncertainties  incident  to  the  doctrine  ;  and  of  its 
vast  consequences  in  extending  the  powers  of  the  Federal  Government,  and 
in  superseding  the  authorities  of  the  State  governments — the  committee  feel 
the  utmost  confidence  in  concluding  that  the  common  law  never  was,  nor  by 
any  fair  construction  ever  can  be,  deemed  a  law  for  the  American  people  as 
one  community ;  and  they  indulge  the  strongest  expectation  that  the  same 
conclusion  will  finally  be  drawn  by  all  candid  and  accurate  inquirers  into  the 
subject.  It  is,  indeed,  distressing  to  reflect  that  it  ever  should  have  been  made 
a  question,  whether  the  Constitution,  on  the  whole  face  of  which  is  seen  so 
much  labor  to  enumerate  and  define  the  several  objects  of  Federal  power, 
could  intend  to  introduce  in  the  lump,  in  an  indirect  manner,  and  by  a  forced 
construction  of  a  few  phrases,  the  vast  and  multifarious  jurisdiction  involved 
in  the  common  law — a  law  filling  so  many  ample  volumes ;  a  law  overspread- 
ing the  entire  field  of  legislation ;  and  a  law  that  would  sap  the  foundation  of 
the  Constitution  as  a  system  of  limited  and  specified  powers.  A  severer  re- 
proach could  not,  in  the  opinion  of  the  committee,  be  thrown  on  the  Constitu- 
tion, on  those  who  framed  or  on  those  who  established  it,  than  such  a  suppo- 
sition would  throw  on  them. 

The  argument,  then,  drawn  from  the  common  law,  on  the  ground  of  its  be- 
ing adopted  or  recognised  by  the  Constitution,  being  inapplicable  to  the  Sedi- 
tion Act,  the  committee  will  proceed  to  examine  the  other  arguments  which 
have  been  founded  on  the  Constitution. 

They  will  waste  but  little  time  on  the  attempt  to  cover  the  act  by  the  pre- 


540  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

amble  to  the  Constitution,  it  being  contrary  to  every  acknowledged  rule  of 
construction  to  set  up  this  part  of  an  instrument  in  opposition  to  the  plain 
meaning  expressed  in  the  body  of  the  instrument.  A  preamble  usually  con- 
tains the  general  motives  or  reasons  for  the  particular  regulations  or  measures 
which  follow  it,  and  is  always  understood  to  be  explained  and  limited  by  them. 
In  the  present  instance,  a  contrary  interpretation  would  have  the  inadmissible 
effect  of  rendering  nugatory  or  improper  every  part  of  the  Constitution  which 
succeeds  the  preamble. 

The  paragraph  in  Article  I,  Section  8,  which  contains  the  power  to  lay  and 
collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts,  and  excises,  to  pay  the  debts  and  provide  for  the 
common  defence  and  general  welfare,  having  been  already  examined,  will  also 
require  no  particular  attention  in  this  place.  It  will  have  been  seen  that,  in 
its  fair  and  consistent  meaning,  it  cannot  enlarge  the  enumerated  powers 
vested  in  Cougress. 

The  part  of  the  Constitution  which  seems  most  to  be  recurred  to,  in  the  de- 
fence of  the  Sedition  Act,  is  the  last  clause  of  the  above  section,  empowering 
Congress  "  to  make  all  laws  which  shall  be  necessary  and  proper  for  carrying 
into  execution  the  foregoing  powers,  and  all  other  powers  vested  by  this  Consti- 
tution in  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  or  in  any  department  or  officer 
thereof." 

The  plain  import  of  this  clause  is,  that  Congress  shall  have  all  the  inci- 
dental or  instrumental  powers  necessary  and  proper  for  carrying  into  execu- 
tion all  the  express  powers,  whether  they  be  vested  in  the  Government  of  the 
United  States,  more  collectively,  or  in  the  several  departments  or  officers 
thereof. 

It  is  not  a  grant  of  new  powers  to  Congress,  but  merely  a  declaration,  for 
the  removal  of  all  uncertainty,  that  the  means  of  carrying  into  execution  those 
otherwise  granted  are  included  in  the  grant. 

Whenever,  therefore,  a  question  arises  concerning  the  constitutionality  of  a 
particular  power,  the  first  question  is,  whether  the  power  be  expressed  in  the 
Constitution.  If  it  be,  the  question  is  decided.  If  it  be  not  expressed,  the 
next  inquiry  must  be,  whether  it  is  properly  an  incident  to  an  express  power, 
and  necessary  to  its  execution.  If  it  be,  it  may  be  exercised  by  Congress.  If 
it  be  not,  Congress  cannot  exercise  it. 

Let  the  question  be  asked,  then,  whether  the  power  over  the  press  exercised 
in  the  Sedition  Act  be  found  among  the  powers  expressly  vested  in  the  Con- 
gress.    This  is  not  pretended. 

Is  there  any  express  power,  for  executing  which  it  is  a  necessary  and  proper 
power  ? 

The  power  which  has  been  selected,  as  least  remote,  in  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion, is  that  "  of  suppressing  insurrections  ; "  which  is  said  to  imply  a  power 
to  prevent  insurrections,  by  punishing  whatever  may  lead  or  tend  to  them. 
But  it  surely  cannot,  with  the  least  plausibility,  be  said,  that  the  regulation  of 


1700 1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  541 

the  press,  and  a  punishment  of  libels,  are  exercises  of  a  power  to  suppress  in- 
surrections. The  most  that  could  be  said  would  be  that  the  punishment  of 
libels,  if  it  had  the  tendency  ascribed  to  it,  might  prevent  the  occasion  of 
passing  or  executing  laws  necessary  and  proper  for  the  suppression  of  insur- 
rections. 

lias  the  Federal  Government  no  power,  then,  to  prevent  as  well  as  to  punish 
resistence  to  the  laws  ? 

They  have  the  power,  which  the  Constitution  deemed  most  proper,  in  their 
hands  for  the  purpose.  The  Congress  has  power,  before  it  happens,  to  pass 
laws  for  punishing  it;  and  the  executive  and  judiciary  have  power  to  enforce 
those  laws  when  it  does  happen. 

It  must  be  recollected  by  many,  and  could  be  shown  to  the  satisfaction  of 
all,  that  the  construction  here  put  on  the  terms  "  necessary  and  proper  "  is 
precisely  the  construction  which  prevailed  during  the  discussions  and  ratifica- 
tions of  the  Constitution.  It  may  be  added,  and  cannot  too  often  be  repeated, 
that  it  is  a  construction  absolutely  necessary  to  maintain  their  consistency 
with  the  peculiar  character  of  the  Government,  as  possessed  of  particular 
and  definite  powers  only,  not  of  the  general  and  indefinite  powers  vested  in 
ordinary  Governments  ;  for  if  the  power  to  suppress  insurrections  includes  a 
power  to  punish  libels,  or  if  the  power  to  punish  includes  a  power  to  prevent, 
bv  all  the  means  that  may  have  that  tendency,  such  is  the  relation  and  influ- 
ence among  the  most  remote  subjects  of  legislation,  that  a  power  over  a  very 
few  would  carry  with  it  a  power  over  all.  And  it  must  be  wholly  immaterial 
whether  unlimited  powers  be  exercised  under  the  name  of  unlimited  powers, 
or  be  exercised  under  the  name  of  unlimited  means  of  carrying  into  execution 
limited  powers. 

This  branch  of  the  subject  will  be  closed  with  a  reflection  which  must  have 
weight  with  all,  but  more  especially  with  those  who  place  peculiar  reliance  on 
the  judicial  exposition  of  the  Constitution  as  the  bulwark  provided  against  un- 
due extensions  of  the  legislative  power.  If  it  be  understood  that  the  powers 
implied  in  the  specified  powers  have  an  immediate  and  appropriate  relation  to 
them,  as  means  necessary  and  proper  for  carrying  them  into  execution,  ques- 
tions on  the  constitutionality  of  laws  passed  for  this  purpose  will  be  of  a  na- 
ture sufficiently  precise  and  determinate  for  judicial  cognizance  and  control. 
If,  on  the  other  hand,  Congress  are  not  limited  in  the  choice  of  means  by  any 
such  appropriate  relation  of  them  to  the  specified  powers  ;  but  may  employ  all 
such  means  as  they  may  deem  fitted  to  prevent  as  well  as  to  punish  crimes 
subjected  to  their  authority;  such  as  may  have  a  tendency  only  to  promote  an 
object  for  which  they  are  authorized  to  provide ;  every  one  must  perceive  that 
questions  relating  to  means  of  this  sort  must  be  questions  for  mere  policy  and 
expediency,  on  which  legislative  discretion  alone  can  decide,  and  from  which 
the  judicial  interposition  and  control  are  completely  excluded. 

II.  The  next  point  which  the  resolution  requires  to  be  proved  is,  that  the 


542  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

power  over  the  press  exercised  by  the  Sedition  Act  is  positively  forbidden  by 
one  of  the  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

The  amendment  stands  in  these  words  :  "Congress  shall  make  no  law  re- 
specting an  establishment  of  religion,  or  prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof, 
or  abridging  the  freedom  of  speech  or  of  the  press ;  or  the  right  of  the  people 
peaceably  to  assemble  and  to  petition  the  Government  for  a  redress  of  griev- 
ances." 

In  the  attempts  to  vindicate  the  Sedition  Act  it  has  been  contended — 1. 
That  the  "freedom  of  the  press"  is  to  be  determined  by  the  meaning  of  these 
terms  in  the  common  law.  2.  That  the  article  supposes  the  power  over  the 
press  to  be  in  Congress,  and  prohibits  them  only  from  abridging  the  freedom 
allowed  to  it  by  the  common  law. 

Although  it  will  be  shown,  on  examining  the  second  of  these  positions,  that 
the  amendment  is  a  denial  to  Congress  of  all  power  over  the  press,  it  may  not 
be  useless  to  make  the  following  observations  on  the  first  of  them: 

It  is  deemed  to  be  a  sound  opinion  that  the  Sedition  Act,  in  its  definition  of 
some  of  the  crimes  created,  is  an  abridgment  of  the  freedom  of  publication, 
recognised  by  principles  of  the  common  law  in  England. 

The  freedom  of  the  press  under  the  common  law  is,  in  the  defences  of  the 
Sedition  Act,  made  to  consist  in  an  exemption  from  all  previous  restraint  on 
printed  publications  by  persons  authorized  to  inspect  and  prohibit  them.  It 
appears  to  the  committee  that  this  idea  of  the  freedom  of  the  press  can  never 
be  admitted  to  be  the  American  idea  of  it;  since  a  law  inflicting  penalties  on 
printed  publications  would  have  a  similar  effect  with  a  law  authorizing  a  pre- 
vious restraint  on  them.  It  would  seem  a  mockery  to  say  that  no  laws  should 
be  passed  preventing  publications  from  being  made,  but  that  laws  might  be 
passed  for  punishing  them  in  case  they  should  be  made. 

The  essential  difference  between  the  British  Government  and  the  American 
Constitutions  will  place  this  subject  in  the  clearest  light. 

In  the  British  Government  the  danger  of  encroachments  on  the  rights  of  the 
people  is  understood  to  be  confined  to  the  executive  magistrate.  The  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people  in  the  Legislature  are  not  only  exempt  themselves  from 
distrust,  but  are  considered  as  sufficient  guardians  of  the  rights  of  their  con- 
stituents against  the  danger  from  the  Executive.  Hence  it  is  a  principle,  that 
the  Parliament  is  unlimited  in  its  power;  or,  in  their  own  language,  is  omnipo- 
tent. Hence,  too,  all  the  ramparts  for  protecting  the  rights  of  the  people — 
such  as  their  Magna  Charta,  their  Bill  of  Rights,  &c. — are  not  reared  against 
the  Parliament,  but  against  the  royal  prerogative.  They  are  merely  legislative 
precautions  against  executive  usurpations.  Under  such  a  government  as  this, 
an  exemption  of  the  press  from  previous  restraint,  by  licensers  appointed  by 
the  King,  is  all  the  freedom  that  can  be  secured  to  it. 

In  the  United  States  the  case  is  altogether  different.  The  People,  not  the 
Government,  possess  the  absolute  sovereignty.     The  Legislature,  no  less  than 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  543 

the  Executive,  is  under  limitations  of  power.  Encroachments  are  regarded  as 
possible  from  the  one  as  well  as  from  the  other.  Hence,  in  the  United  States 
the  great  and  essential  rights  of  the  people  are  secured  against  legislative  as 
■well  as  against  executive  ambition.  They  are  secured,  not  by  laws  paramount 
to  prerogative,  but  by  constitutions  paramount  to  laws.  This  security  of  the 
freedom  of  the  press  requires  that  it  should  be  exempt  not  only  from  previous 
restraint  by  the  Executive,  as  in  Great  Britain,  but  from  legislative  restraint 
also;  and  this  exemption,  to  be  effectual,  must  be  an  exemption  not  only  from 
the  previous  inspection  of  licensers,  but  from  the  subsequent  penalty  of  laws. 
The  state  of  the  press,  therefore,  under  the  common  law,  cannot,  in  this  point 
of  view,  be  the  standard  of  its  freedom  in  the  United  States. 

But  there  is  another  view  under  which  it  may  be  necessary  to  consider  this 
subject.  It  may  be  alleged  that  although  the  security  for  the  freedom  of  the 
press  be  different  in  Great  Britain  and  in  this  country,  being  a  legal  security 
only  in  the  former,  and  a  constitutional  security  in  the  latter ;  and  although 
there  may  be  a  further  difference,  in  an  extension  of  the  freedom  of  the  press, 
here,  beyond  an  exemption  from  previous  restraint,  to  an  exemption  from  sub- 
sequent penalties  also ;  yet  that  the  actual  legal  freedom  of  the  press,  under 
the  common  law,  must  determine  the  degree  of  freedom  which  is  meant  by  the 
terms,  and  which  is  constitutionally  secured  against  both  previous  and  subse- 
quent restraints. 

The  committee  are  not  unaware  of  the  difficulty  of  all  general  questions 
which  may  turn  on  the  proper  boundary  between  the  liberty  and  licentiousness 
of  the  press.  They  will  leave  it,  therefore,  for  consideration  only  how  far  the 
difference  between  the  nature  of  the  British  Government  and  the  nature  of  the 
American  Governments,  and  the  practice  under  the  latter,  may  show  the  degree 
of  rigor  in  the  former  to  be  inapplicable  to  and  not  obligatory  in  the  latter. 

The  nature  of  governments  elective,  limited,  and  responsible  in  all  their 
branches,  may  well  be  supposed  to  require  a  greater  freedom  of  animadversion 
than  might  be  tolerated  by  the  genius  of  such  a  government  as  that  of  Great 
Britain.  In  the  latter  it  is  a  maxim  that  the  King,  an  hereditary,  not  a  respon- 
sible magistrate,  can  do  no  wrong,  and  that  the  Legislature,  which  in  two-thirds 
of  its  composition  is  also  hereditary,  not  responsible,  can  do  what  it  pleases. 
In  the  United  States  the  executive  magistrates  are  not  held  to  be  infallible, 
nor  the  Legislatures  to  be  omnipotent ;  and  both  being  elective,  are  both  respon. 
sible.  Is  it  not  natural  and  necessary,  under  such  different  circumstances, 
that  a  different  degree  of  freedom  in  the  use  of  the  press  should  be  contem- 
plated ? 

Is  not  such  an  inference  favoured  by  what  is  observable  in  Great  Britain 
itself?  Notwithstanding  the  general  doctrine  of  the  common  law  on  the  sub- 
ject of  the  press,  and  the  occasional  punishment  of  those  who  use  it  with  a 
freedom  offensive  to  the  Government,  it  is  well  known  that  with  respect  to  the 
responsible  members  of  the  Government,  where  the  reasons  operating  here 


544  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

become  applicable  there,  the  freedom  exercised  by  the  press  and  protected  by 
public  opinion  far  exceeds  the  limits  prescribed  by  the  ordinary  rides  of  law. 
The  ministry,  who  are  responsible  to  impeachment,  are  at  all  times  animad- 
verted on  by  the  press  with  peculiar  freedom,  and  during  the  elections  for  the 
House  of  Commons,  the  other  responsible  part  of  the  Government,  the  press  is 
employed  with  as  little  reserve  towards  the  candidates. 

The  practice  in  America  must  be  entitled  to  much  more  respect.  In  every 
State,  probably,  in  the  Union,  the  press  has  exerted  a  freedom  in  canvassing 
the  merits  and  measures  of  public  men  of  every  description  which  has  not  been 
confined  to  the  strict  limits  of  the  common  law.  On  this  footing  the  freedom 
of  the  press  has  stood ;  on  this  footing  it  yet  stands.  And  it  will  not  be  a 
breach  either  of  truth  or  of  candour  to  say,  that  no  persons  or  presses  are  in 
tbe  habit  of  more  unrestrained  animadversions  on  the  proceedings  and  func- 
tionaries of  the  State  governments  than  the  persons  and  presses  most  zealous 
in  vindicating  the  act  of  Congress  for  punishing  similar  animadversions  on  the 
Government  of  the  United  States. 

The  last  remark  will  not  be  understood  as  claiming  for  the  State  govern- 
ments an  immunity  greater  than  they  have  heretofore  enjoyed.  Some  degree 
of  abuse  is  inseparable  from  the  proper  use  of  every  thing,  and  in  no  instance 
is  this  more  true  than  in  that  of  the  press.  It  has  accordingly  been  decided 
by  the  practice  of  the  States,  that  it  is  better  to  leave  a  few  of  its  noxious 
branches  to  their  luxuriant  growth,  than,  by  pruning  them  away,  to  injure  the 
vigour  of  those  yielding  the  proper  fruits.  And  can  the  wisdom  of  this  policy 
be  doubted  by  any  who  reflect  that  to  the  press  alone,  chequered  as  it  is 
with  abuses,  the  world  is  indebted  for  all  the  triumphs  which  have  been  gained 
by  reason  and  humanity  over  error  and  oppression ;  who  reflect  that  to  the 
same  beneficent  source  the  United  States  owe  much  of  the  lights  which  con- 
ducted them  to  the  ranks  of  a  free  and  independent  nation,  and  which  have 
improved  their  political  system  into  a  shape  so  auspicious  to  their  happiness? 
Had  "Sedition  Acts,"  forbidding  every  publication  that  might  bring  the  con- 
stituted agents  into  contempt  or  disrepute,  or  that  might  excite  the  hatred  of 
the  people  against  the  authors  of  unjust  or  pernicious  measures,  been  uniformly 
enforced  against  the  press,  might  not  the  United  States  have  been  languishing 
at  this  day  under  the  infirmities  of  a  sickly  Confederation  ?  Might  they  not, 
possibly,  be  miserable  colonies,  groaning  under  a  foreign  yoke  ? 

To  these  observations  one  fact  will  be  added,  which  demonstrates  that  the 
common  law  cannot  be  admitted  as  the  universal  expositor  of  American  terms, 
which  may  be  the  same  with  those  contained  in  that  law.  The  freedom  of 
conscience  and  of  religion  are  found  in  the  same  instruments  which  assert  the 
freedom  of  the  press.  It  will  never  be  admitted  that  the  meaning  of  the 
former,  in  the  common  law  of  England,  is  to  limit  their  meaning  in  the  United 
States. 

Whatever  weight  may  be  allowed  to  these  considerations,  the  committee  do 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  545 

not,  however,  by  any  means  intend  to  rest  the  question  on  tnera.  They 
contend  that  the  article  of  amendment,  instead  of  supposing  in  Congress  a 
power  that  might  be  exercised  over  the  press,  provided  its  freedom  was  not 
abridged,  was  meant  as  a  positive  denial  to  Congress  of  any  power  whatever 
on  the  subject. 

To  demonstrate  that  this  was  the  true  object  of  the  article,  it  will  be  suffi- 
cient to  recall  the  circumstances  which  led  to  it,  and  to  refer  to  the  explana- 
tion accompanying  the  article. 

When  the  Constitution  was  under  the  discussions  which  preceded  its  ratifi- 
cation, it  is  well  known  that  great  apprehensions  were  expressed  by  many, 
lest  the  omission  of  some  positive  exception,  from  the  powers  delegated,  of 
certain  rights,  and  of  the  freedom  of  the  press  particularly,  might  expose  them 
to  the  danger  of  being  drawn,  by  construction,  within  some  of  the  powers  vest- 
ed in  Congress,  more  especially  of  the  power  to  make  all  laws  necessary  and 
proper  for  carrying  their  other  powers  into  execution.  In  reply  to  this  objec- 
tion, it  was  invariably  urged  to  be  a  fundamental  and  characteristic  principle 
of  the  Constitution,  that  all  powers  not  given  by  it  were  reserved  ;  that  no 
powers  were  given  beyond  those  enumerated  in  the  Constitution,  and  such  as 
were  fairly  incident  to  them ;  that  the  power  over  the  rights  in  question,  and 
particularly  over  the  press,  was  neither  among  the  enumerated  powers,  nor 
incident  to  any  of  them ;  and  consequently  that  an  exercise  of  any  such  power 
would  be  manifest  usurpation.  It  is  painful  to  remark  how  much  the  argu- 
ments now  employed  in  behalf  of  the  Sedition  Act  are  at  variance  with  the 
reasoning  which  then  justified  the  Constitution,  and  invited  its  ratification. 

From  this  posture  of  the  subject  resulted  the  interesting  question,  in  so 
many  of  the  Conventions,  whether  the  doubts  and  dangers  ascribed  to  the 
Constitution  should  be  removed  by  any  amendments  previous  to  the  ratifica- 
tion, or  be  postponed  in  confidence  that,  as  far  as  they  might  be  proper,  they 
would  be  introduced  in  the  form  provided  by  the  Constitution.  The  latter 
course  was  adopted ;  and  in  most  of  the  States,  ratifications  were  followed  by 
propositions  and  instructions  for  rendering  the  Constitution  more  explicit, 
and  more  safe  to  the  rights  not  meant  to  be  delegated  by  it.  Among  those 
rights,  the  freedom  of  the  press,  in  most  instances,  is  particularly  and  em- 
phatically mentioned.  The  firm  and  very  pointed  manner  in  which  it  is  as- 
serted in  the  proceedings  of  the  Convention  of  this  State  will  be  hereafter 
seen. 

In  pursuance  of  the  wishes  thus  expressed,  the  first  Congress  that  assem- 
bled under  the  Constitution  proposed  certain  amendments,  which  have  since, 
by  the  necessary  ratifications,  been  made  a  part  of  it ;  among  which  amend- 
ments is  the  article  containing,  among  other  prohibitions  on  the  Congress,  an 
express  declaration  that  they  should  make  no  law  abridging  the  freedom  of 
the  pres3. 

"Without  tracing  farther  the  evidence  on  this  subject,  it  would  seem  scarcely 

vol.  iv.  35 


546  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

possible  to  doubt  that  no  power  whatever  over  the  press  was  supposed  to  be 
delegated  by  the  Constitution,  as  it  originally  stood,  and  that  the  amendment 
was  intended  as  a  positive  and  absolute  reservation  of  it. 

But  the  evidence  is  still  stronger.  The  proposition  of  amendments  made 
by  Congress  is  introduced  in  the  following  terms  : 

"  The  Conventions  of  a  nuir.oer  of  the  States  having,  at  the  time  of  their 
adopting  the  Constitution,  expressed  a  desire,  in  order  to  prevent  misconstruc- 
tions or  abuse  of  its  powers,  that  further  declaratory  and  restrictive  clauses 
should  be  added ;  and  as  extending  the  ground  of  public  confidence  in  the 
Government  will  best  insure  the  beneficent  ends  of  its  institution." 

Here  is  the  most  satisfactory  and  authentic  proof  that  the  several  amend- 
ments proposed  were  to  be  considered  as  either  declaratory  or  restrictive,  and, 
whether  the  one  or  the  other,  as  corresponding  with  the  desire  expressed  by  a 
number  of  the  States,  and  as  extending  the  ground  of  public  confidence  in  the 
Government. 

Under  any  other  construction  of  the  amendment  relating  to  the  press,  than 
that  it  declared  the  press  to  be  wholly  exempt  from  the  power  of  Congress,  the 
amendment  could  neither  be  said  to  correspond  with  the  desire  expressed  by 
a  number  of  the  States,  nor  be  calculated  to  extend  the  ground  of  public  con- 
fidence in  the  Government. 

Nay,  more ;  the  construction  employed  to  justify  the  Sedition  Act  would 
exhibit  a  phenomenon  without  a  parallel  in  the  political  world.  It  would  ex- 
hibit a  number  of  respectable  States,  as  denying,  first,  that  any  power  over 
the  press  was  delegated  by  the  Constitution ;  as  proposing,  next,  that  an 
amendment  to  it  should  explicitly  declare  that  no  such  power  was  delegated; 
and,  finally,  as  concurring  in  an  amendment  actually  recognising  or  delega- 
ting such  a  power. 

Is,  then,  the  Federal  Government,  it  will  be  ashed,  destitute  of  every  au- 
thority for  restraining  the  licentiousness  of  the  press,  and  for  shielding  itself 
against  the  libellous  attacks  which  may  be  made  on  those  who  administer  it? 

The  Constitution  alone  can  answer  this  question.  If  no  such  power  be  ex- 
pressly delegated,  and  if  it  be  not  both  necessary  and  proper  to  carry  into  ex- 
ecution an  express  power — above  all,  if  it  be  expressly  forbidden,  by  a  declar- 
atory amendment  to  the  Constitution — the  answer  must  be,  that  the  Federal 
Government  is  destitute  of  all  such  authority. 

And  might  it  not  be  asked,  in  turn,  whether  it  is  not  more  probable,  under 
all  the  circumstances  which  have  been  reviewed,  that  the  authority  should  be 
withheld  by  the  Constitution,  than  that  it  should  be  left  to  a  vague  and  vio- 
lent construction,  whilst  so  much  pains  were  bestowed  in  enumerating  other 
powers,  and  so  many  less  important  powers  are  included  in  the  enumeration? 

Might  it  not  be  likewise  asked,  whether  the  anxious  circumspection  which 
dictated  so  many  peculiar  limitations  on  the  general  authority  would  be  un- 
likely to  exempt  the  press  altogether  from  that  authority?    The  peculiar  mag- 


1799— 1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  547 

nitude  of  some  of  the  powers  necessarily  committed  to  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment; the  peculiar  duration  required  for  the  functions  of  some  of  its  depart- 
ments ;  the  peculiar  distance  of  the  seat  of  its  proceedings  from  the  great  body 
of  its  constituents;  and  the  peculiar  difficulty  of  circulating  an  adequate 
knowledge  of  them  through  any  other  channel ;  will  not  these  considerations, 
some  or  other  of  which  produced  other  exceptions  from  the  powers  of  ordinary 
governments,  all  together,  account  for  the  policy  of  binding  the  hand  of  the 
Federal  Government  from  touching  the  channel  which  alone  can  give  efficacy 
to  its  responsibility  to  its  constituents,  and  of  leaving  those  who  administer  it 
to  a  remedy,  lor  their  injured  reputations,  under  the  same  laws,  and  in  the 
same  tribunals,  which  protect  their  lives,  their  liberties,  and  their  properties? 

But  the  question  does  not  turn  either  on  the  wisdom  of  the  Constitution  or 
on  the  policy  which  gave  rise  to  its  particular  organization.  It  turns  on  the 
actual  meaning  of  the  instrument,  by  which  it  has  appeared  that  a  power  over 
the  press  is  clearly  excluded  from  the  number  of  powers  delegated  to  the  Fed- 
eral Government. 

III.  And,  in  the  opinion  of  the  committee,  well  may  it  be  said,  as  the  resolu- 
tion concludes  with  saying,  that  the  unconstitutional  power  exercised  over  the 
press  by  the  Sedition  Act  ought,  "  more  than  any  other,  to  produce  universal 
alarm ;  because  it  is  levelled  against  that  right  of  freely  examining  public 
characters  and  measures,  and  of  free  communication  among  the  people  there- 
on, which  has  ever  been  justly  deemed  the  only  effectual  guardian  of  every 
other  right." 

Without  scrutinizing  minutely  into  all  the  provisions  of  the  Sedition  Act,  it 
will  be  sufficient  to  cite  so  much  of  section  2d  as  follows :  "  And  be  it  further 
enacted,  that  if  any  person  shall  write,  print,  utter,  or  publish,  or  shall  cause  or 
procure  to  be  written,  printed,  uttered,  or  published,  or  shall  knowingly  and  will- 
ingly assist  or  aid  in  writing,  printing,  uttering,  or  publishing,  any  false,  scan- 
dalous, and  malicious  writing  or  writings  against  the  Government  of  the 
United  States,  or  either  house  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  or  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  with  an  intent  to  defame  the  said  Government 
or  either  house  of  the  said  Congress,  or  the  President,  or  to  bring  them  or 
either  of  them  into  contempt  or  disrepute,  or  to  excite  against  them,  or  either 
or  any  of  them,  the  hatred  of  the  good  people  of  the  United  States,  &e. — 
then  such  person,  being  thereof  convicted  before  any  court  of  the  United 
States  having  jurisdiction  thereof,  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  exceeding 
two  thousand  dollars,  and  by  imprisonment  not  exceeding  two  years." 

On  this  part  of  the  act,  the  following  observations  present  themselves: 

1.  The  Constitution  supposes  that  the  President,  the  Congress,  and  each  of 
its  Houses,  may  not  discharge  their  trusts,  either  from  defect  of  judgment  or 
other  causes.  Hence  they  are  all  made  responsible  to  their  constituents,  at 
the  returning  periods  of  election ;  and  the  President,  who  is  singly  intrusted 


548  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

with  very  great  powers,  is,  as  a  further  guard,  subjected  to  an  intermediate 
impeachment. 

2.  Should  it  happen,  as  the  Constitution  supposes  it  may  happen,  that  either 
of  these  branches  of  the  Government  may  not  have  duly  discharged  its  trust; 
it  is  natural  and  proper,  that,  according  to  the  cause  and  degree  of  their 
faults,  they  should  be  brought  into  contempt  or  disrepute,  and  incur  the  hatred 
of  the  people. 

3.  Whether  it  has,  in  any  case,  happened  that  the  proceedings  of  either  or 
all  of  those  branches  evince  such  a  violation  of  duty  as  to  justify  a  contempt, 
a  disrepute,  or  hatred  among  the  people,  can  only  be  determined  by  a  free  ex- 
amination thereof,  and  a  free  communication  among  the  people  thereon. 

4.  Whenever  it  may  have  actually  happened  that  proceedings  of  this  sort 
are  chargeable  on  all  or  either  of  the  branches  of  the  Government,  it  is  the 
duty,  as  well  as  right,  of  intelligent  and  faithful  citizens  to  discuss  and  pro- 
mulge  them  freely,  as  well  to  control  them  by  the  censorship  of  the  public 
opinion,  as  to  promote  a  remedy  according  to  the  rules  of  the  Constitution. 
And  it  cannot  be  avoided  that  those  who  are  to  apply  the  remedy  must  feel, 
in  some  degree,  a  contempt  or  hatred  against  the  transgressing  party. 

5.  As  the  act  was  passed  on  July  14,  1798,  and  is  to  be  in  force  until  March 
3,  1801,  it  was  of  course  that,  during  its  continuance,  two  elections  of  the  en- 
tire House  of  Representatives,  an  election  of  a  part  of  the  Senate,  and  an  elec- 
tion of  a  President,  were  to  take  place. 

G.  That,  consequently,  during  all  these  elections,  intended  by  the  Constitu- 
tion to  preserve  the  purity  or  to  purge  the  faults  of  the  Administration,  the 
great  remedial  rights  of  the  people  were  to  be  exercised,  and  the  responsibility 
of  their  public  agents  to  be  screened,  under  the  penalties  of  this  act. 

May  it  not  be  asked  of  every  intelligent  friend  to  the  liberties  of  his  country, 
whether  the  power  exercised  in  such  an  act  as  this  ought  not  to  produce  great 
and  universal  alarm  ?  Whether  a  rigid  execution  of  such  an  act,  in  time  past, 
would  not  have  repressed  that  information  and  communication  among  the 
people  which  is  indispensable  to  the  just  exercise  of  their  electoral  rights? 
And  whether  such  an  act,  if  made  perpetual,  and  enforced  with  rigor,  would 
not,  in  time  to  come,  either  destroy  our  free  system  of  government,  or  prepare 
a  convulsion  that  might  prove  equally  fatal  to  it  ? 

In  answer  to  such  questions,  it  has  been  pleaded  that  the  writings  and  pub- 
lications forbidden  by  the  act  are  those  only  which  are  false  and  malicious, 
and  intended  to  defame ;  and  merit  is  claimed  for  the  privilege  allowed  to  au- 
thors to  justify,  by  proving  the  truth  of  their  publications,  and  for  the  limita- 
tions to  which  the  sentence  of  fine  and  imprisonment  is  subjected. 

To  those  who  concurred  in  the  act,  under  the  extraordinary  belief  that  the 
option  lay  between  the  passing  of  such  an  act  and  leaving  in  force  the  com- 
mon law  of  libels,  which  punishes  truth  equally  with  falsehood,  and  submits 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  549 

the  fine  and  imprisonment  to  the  indefinite  discretion  of  the  court,  the  merit  of 
good  intentions  ought  surely  not  to  be  refused.  A  like  merit  may  perhaps  be 
due  for  the  discontinuance  of  the  corporal  punishment,  which  the  common 
law  also  leaves  to  the  discretion  of  the  court.  This  merit  of  intention,  how- 
ever, would  have  been  greater,  if  the  several  mitigations  had  not  been  limited 
to  so  short  a  period  ;  and  the  apparent  inconsistency  would  have  been  avoided, 
between  justifying  the  act,  at  one  time,  by  contrasting  it  with  the  rigors  of  the 
common  law  otherwise  in  force ;  and  at  another  time,  by  appealing  to  the  na- 
ture of  the  crisis,  as  requiring  the  temporary  rigor  exerted  by  the  act. 

But,  whatever  may  have  been  the  meritorious  intentions  of  all  or  any  who 
contributed  to  the  Sedition  Act,  a  very  few  reflections  will  prove  that  it.s  bale- 
ful tendency  is  little  diminished  by  the  privilege  of  giving  in  evidence  the  truth 
of  the  matter  contained  in  polit  cal  wr  tings. 

In  the  first  place,  where  simple  and  naked  facts  alone  are  in  question,  there 
is  sufficient  difficulty  in  some  cases,  and  sufficient  trouble  and  vexation  in  all, 
of  meeting  a  prosecution  from  the  Government  with  the  full  and  formal  proof 
necessary  in  a  court  of  law. 

But  in  the  next  place,  it  must  be  obvious  to  the  plainest  minds,  that  opin- 
ions and  inferences,  and  conjectural  observations,  are  not  only  in  many  cases 
inseparable  from  the  facts,  but  may  often  be  more  the  objects  of  the  prosecu- 
tion than  the  facts  themselves  ;  or  may  even  be  altogether  abstracted  from 
particular  facts ;  and  that  opinions,  and  inferences,  and  conjectural  observa- 
tions, cannot  be  subjects  of  that  kind  of  proof  which  appertains  to  facts,  be- 
fore a  court  of  law. 

Again  :  it  is  no  less  obvious  that  the  intent  to  defame,  or  bring  into  con- 
tempt, or  disrepute,  or  hatred — which  is  made  a  condition  of  the  offence 
created  by  the  act— cannot  prevent  its  pernicious  influence  on  the  freedom  of 
the  press.  For,  omitting  the  inquiry,  how  far  the  malice  of  the  intent  is  an 
inference  of  the  law  from  the  mere  publication,  it  is  manifestly  impossible  to 
punish  the  intent  to  bring  those  who  administer  the  Government  into  disre- 
pute or  contempt,  without  striking  at  the  right  of  freely  discussing  public 
characters  and  measures  ;  because  those  who  engage  in  such  discussions  must 
expect  and  intend  to  excite  these  unfavorable  sentiments,  so  far  as  they  may  be 
thought  to  be  deserved.  To  prohibit,  therefore,  the  intent  to  excite  those  unfa- 
vorable sentiments  against  those  who  administer  the  Government,  is  equivalent 
to  a  prohibition  of  the  actual  excitement  of  them ;  and  to  prohibit  the  actual  ex- 
citement of  them  is  equivalent  to  a  prohibition  of  discussions  having  that  ten- 
dency and  effect;  which,  again,  is  equivalent  to  a  protection  of  those  who  ad- 
minister the  Government,  if  they  should  at  any  time  deserve  the  contempt  or 
hatred  of  the  people,  against  being  exposed  to  it  by  free  animadversions  on 
their  characters  and  conduct.  Nor  can  there  be  a  doubt,  if  those  in  public 
trust  be  shielded  by  penal  laws  from  such  strictures  of  the  press  as  may  ex- 
pose them  to  contempt,  or  disrepute,  or  hatred,  where  they  may  deserve  it, 


550  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

that,  in  exact  proportion  as  they  may  deserve  to  be  exposed,  will  be  the  cer- 
tainty and  criminality  of  the  intent  to  expose  them,  and  the  vigilance  of  pros- 
ecuting  and  punishing  it;  nor  a  doubt  that  a  government  thus  intrenched  in 
penal  statutes  against  the  just  and  natural  effects  of  a  culpable  administration 
will  easily  evade  the  responsibility  which  is  essential  to  a  faithful  discharge 
of  its  duty. 

Let  it  be  recollected,  lastly,  that  the  right  of  electing  the  members  of  the  Gov- 
ernment constitutes  more  particularly  the  essence  of  a  free  and  responsible  gov- 
ernment. The  value  and  efficacy  of  this  right  depends  on  the  knowledge  of  the 
comparative  merits  and  demerits  of  the  candidates  for  public  trust,  and  on  the 
equal  freedom,  consequently,  of  examining  and  discussing  these  merits  and  de- 
merits of  the  candidates  respectively.  It  has  been  seen  that  a  number  of  import- 
ant elections  will  take  place  while  the  act  is  in  force,  although  it  should  not  be 
continued  beyond  the  term  to  which  it  is  limited.  Should  then'  happen,  then, 
as  is  extremely  probable  in  relation  to  some  or  other  of  the  branches  of 
the  Government,  to  be  competitions  between  those  who  are  and  those  who 
are  not  members  of  the  Government,  what  will  be  the  situations  of  the  com- 
petitors ?  Not  equal ;  because  the  characters  of  the  former  will  be  covered 
by  the  Sedition  Act  from  animadversions  exposing  them  to  disrepute  among 
the  people,  whilst  the  latter  maybe  exposed  to  the  contempt  and  hatred  of  the 
people  without  a  violation  of  the  act.  What  will  be  the  situation  of  the  peo- 
ple? Not  free;  because  they  will  be  compelled  to  make  their  election  be- 
tween competitors  whose  pretensions  they  are  not  permitted  by  the  act  equally 
to  examine,  to  discuss,  and  to  ascertain.  And  from  both  these  situations  will 
not  those  in  power  derive  an  undue  advantage  for  continuing  themselves  in 
it,  which,  by  impairing  the  right  of  election,  endangers  the  blessings  of  the 
Government  founded  on  it  ? 

It  is  with  justice,  therefore,  that  the  General  Assembly  have  affirmed,  in 
the  resolution,  as  well  that  the  right  of  freely  examining  public  characters  and 
measures,  and  of  free  communication  thereon,  is  the  only  effectual  guardian 
of  every  other  right,  as  that  this  particular  right  is  levelled  at  by  the  power 
exercised  in  the  Sedition  Act. 

The  Resolution  next  in  order  is  as  follows : 

"That  this  State  having,  by  its  Convention,  which  ratified  the  Federal  Constitution,  cspres-Oy 
declared  that,  among  other  essential  rights,  '  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  of  the  press  cannot  bo 
cancelled,  abridged,  restrained,  or  modified,  by  any  authority  of  tho  United  states;'  and,  from 
its  extreme  anxiety  to  guard  these  rights  from  every  possible  attack  of  sophistry  and  ambition, 
having,  with  other  States,  recommended  an  amendment  for  that  purpose,  which  amendment  was 
in  due  time  annexed  to  the  Constitution,  it  would  mark  a  reproachful  inconsistency,  and  criminal 
degeneracy,  if  an  indifference  were  now  shown  to  the  most  palpable  violation  of  one  of  the  rights 
thus  declared  and  secured,  and  to  the  establishment  of  a  precedent  which  maybe  fatal  to  the 
other." 

To  place  this  Resolution  in  its  just  1'ght,  it  will  be  necessary  to  recur  to  the 
act  of  ratification  by  Virginia,  which  stands  in  the  ensuing  form: 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  551 

"  We,  the  deli  pates  of  the  peoplo  of  Virginia,  duly  elected  in  pursuance  of  a  recommendation 
from  tin-  Genera]  Assembly,  and  now  met  in  Convention,  having  fully  and  freely  investigated  and 
discussed  the  proceedings  of  the  Federal  Convention,  and  being  prepared,  as  well  as  the  most  ma- 
ture  deliberation  hath  enabled  us,  to  decide  thereon — DO,  in  the  name  and  in  behalf  of  the  | 
of  Virginia,  declare  and  make  known,  that  the  powers  grained  under  the  Constitution,  being  de- 
rived  from  the  peoplo  of  the  United  States,  may  be  resumed  by  them  whensoever  the  same  shall 
be  perverted  to  their  injury  or  oppression  ;  and  that  every  power  not  granted  thereby  remains 
With  them,  and  at  their  will.  That,  therefore,  no  right  of  any  denomination  can  be  cancelled, 
abridged,  restrained,  or  modified,  by  the  Congress,  by  the  Senate  or  House  of  Representatives, 
acting  in  any  capacity,  by  the  President,  or  any  department  or  officer  of  the  United  States,  ex- 
cept  in  those  instances  in  which  power  is  given  by  the  Constitution  for  those  purposes  ;  and  that, 
among  other  essential  rights,  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  of  the  press  cannot  bo  cancelled, 
abridged,  restrained,  or  modified,  by  any  authority  of  the  United  States." 

Here  is  an  express  and  solemn  declaration  by  the  Convention  of  the  State, 
that  they  ratified  the  Constitution  in  the  sense  that  no  right  of  any  denomina- 
tion can  be  cancelled,  abridged,  restrained,  or  modified,  by  the  Government 
of  the  United  States,  or  any  part  of  it,  except  in  those  instances  in  which 
power  is  given  by  the  Constitution  ;  and  in  the  sense,  particularly,  "  that  among 
other  essential  rights,  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  freedom  of  the  press  can- 
not be  cancelled,  abridged,  restrained,  or  modified,  by  any  authority  of  the 
United  States." 

Words  could  not  well  express  in  a  fuller  or  more  forcible  manner  the  under- 
standing of  the  Convention,  that  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  the  freedom  of 
the  press  were  equally  and  completely  exempted  from  all  authority  whatever 
of  the  United  States. 

Under  an  anxiety  to  guard  more  effectually  these  rights  against  every  pos- 
sible danger,  the  Convention,  after  ratifying  the  Constitution,  proceeded  to 
prefix  to  certain  amendments  proposed  by  them  a  declaration  of  rights,  in 
which  are  two  articles  providing,  the  one  for  the  liberty  of  conscience,  the 
other  for  the  freedom  of  speech  and  of  the  press. 

Similar  recommendations  having  proceeded  from  a  number  of  other  States, 
and  Congress,  as  has  been  seen,  having,  in  consequence  thereof,  and  with  a 
view  to  extend  the  ground  of  public  confidence,  proposed,  among  other  declar- 
atory and  restrictive  clauses,  a  clause  expressly  securing  the  liberty  of  con- 
science and  of  the  press,  and  Virginia  having  concurred  in  the  ratifications 
which  made  them  a  part  of  the  Constitution,  it  will  remain  with  a  candid  pub-' 
lie  to  decide  whether  it  would  not  mark  an  inconsistency  and  degeneracy,  if 
an  indifference  were  now  shown  to  a  palpable  violation  of  one  of  those  rights — 
the  freedom  of  the  press ;  and  to  a  precedent,  therein,  which  may  be  fatal  to 
the  other — the  free  exercise  of  religion. 

That  the  precedent  established  by  the  violation  of  the  former  of  these  rights 
may,  as  is  affirmed  by  the  resolution,  be  fatal  to  the  latter,  appears  to  be  demon- 
strable by  a  comparison  of  the  grounds  on  which  they  respectively  rest,  and 
from  the  scope  of  reasoning  by  which  the  power  over  the  former  has  been  vin- 
dicated. 


552  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

First.  Both  of  these  rights,  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  of  the  press,  rest 
equally  on  the  original  ground  of  not  being  delegated  by  the  Constitution,  and, 
consequently,  withheld  from  the  Government.  Any  construction,  therefore, 
that  would  attack  this  original  security  for  the  one  must  have  the  like  effect 
on  the  other. 

Secondly.  They  are  both  equally  secured  by  the  supplement  to  the  Consti- 
tution, being  both  included  in  the  same  amendment,  made  at  the  same  time, 
and  by  the  same  authority.  Any  construction  or  argument,  then,  which  would 
turn  the  amendment  into  a  grant  or  acknowledgment  of  power  with  respect  to 
the  press,  might  be  equally  applied  to  the  freedom  of  religion. 

Thirdly.  If  it  be  admitted  that  the  extent  of  the  freedom  of  the  press  se- 
cured by  the  amendment  is  to  be  measured  by  the  common  law  on  this  sub- 
ject, the  same  authority  may  be  resorted  to  for  the  standard  which  is  to  fix  the 
extent  of  the  "free  exercise  of  religion."  It  cannot  be  necessary  to  say  what 
this  standard  would  be ;  whether  the  common  law  be  taken  solely  as  the  un- 
written, or  as  varied  by  the  written  law  of  England. 

Fourthly.  If  the  words  and  phrases  in  the  amendment  are  to  be  considered 
as  chosen  with  a  studied  discrimination,  which  yields  an  argument  for  a  power 
over  the  press  under  the  limitation  that  its  freedom  be  not  abridged,  the  same 
argument  results  from  the  same  consideration  for  a  power  over  the  exercise 
of  religion,  under  the  limitation  that  its  freedom  be  not  prohibited. 

For  if  Congress  may  regulate  the  freedom  of  the  press,  provided  they  do  not 
abridge  it,  because  it  is  said  only  "  they  shall  not  abridge  it,"  and  is  not  said 
"  they  shall  make  no  law  respecting  it,"  the  analogy  of  reasoning  is  conclu- 
sive that  Congress  may  regulate  and  even  abridge  the  free  exercise  of  religion, 
provided  they  do  not  prohibit  it ;  because  it  is  said  only  "  they  shall  not  pro- 
hibit it,"  and  is  not  said  "they  shall  make  no  law  respecting,  or  no  law  abridg- 
ing it." 

The  General  Assembly  were  governed  by  the  clearest  reason,  then,  in  con- 
sidering the  Sedition  Act,  which  legislates  on  the  freedom  of  the  press,  as  es- 
tablishing a  precedent  that  may  be  fatal  to  the  liberty  of  conscience;  and  it 
will  be  the  duty  of  all,  in  proportion  as  they  value  the  security  of  the  latter,  to 
take  the  alarm  at  every  encroachment  on  the  former. 

The  two  concluding  resolutions  only  remain  to  be  examined.  They  are  in 
the  words  following : 

"  That  the  good  people  of  this  Commonwealth  having  ever  felt,  and  continuing  to  feel,  tho  most 
sincere  affection  for  their  brethren  of  the  other  States,  tho  truest  anxiety  for  establishing  and  per- 
petuating the  Union  of  all,  and  the  most  scrupulous  fidelity  to  that  Constitution  which  is  the  pledge 
of  mutual  friendship  and  the  instrument  of  mutual  happiness,  the  General  Assembly  doth  solemnly 
appeal  to  the  like  dispositions  in  the  other  States,  in  confidence  that  they  will  concur  with  this 
Comm  nwealth  in  declaring,  as  it  does  hereby  declare,  that  tho  acts  aforesaid  are  unconstitutional; 
and  that  tho  uecessary  and  proper  measures  will  be  taken  by  each  for  co-operating  with  this  State 
in  maintaining,  unimpaired,  the  authorities,  rights,  and  liberties  reserved  to  the  States  respect- 
ively, or  to  tho  people. 

"  That  tho  Governor  bo  desired  to  transmit  a  copy  of  the  foregoing  resolutions  to  the  executive 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  553 

authority  of  each  of  the  other  States,  with  a  request  that  the  same  may  be  communicated  to  tho 
Legislature  then  of;  and  that  a  copy  be  furnished  to  each  of  the  Senators  and  Representatives  rep- 
resenting this  State  in  tho  Congress  of  the  United  States." 

The  fairness  and  regularity  of  the  course  of  proceeding  here  pursued  have 
not  protected  it  against  objections  even  from  sources  too  respectable  to  be 
disregarded. 

It  has  been  said  that  it  belongs  to  the  judiciary  of  the  United  States, 
and  not  the  State  Legislatures,  to  declare  the  meaning  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution. 

But  a  declaration  that  proceedings  of  the  Federal  Government  are  not  war- 
ranted by  the  Constitution  is  a  novelty  neither  among  the  citizens  nor  among 
the  Legislatures  of  the  States  ;  nor  are  the  citizens  or  the  Legislature  of  Vir- 
ginia singular  in  the  example  of  it. 

Nor  can  the  declarations  of  either,  whether  affirming  or  denying  the  consti- 
tutionality of  measures  of  the  Federal  Government,  or  whether  made  before 
or  after  judicial  decisions  thereon,  be  deemed,  in  any  point  of  view,  an  assump- 
tion of  the  office  of  the  judge.  The  declarations  in  such  cases  are  expressions 
of  opinion,  unaccompanied  with  any  other  effect  than  what  they  may  produce 
on  opinion  by  exciting  reflection.  The  expositions  of  the  judiciary,  on  the 
other  hand,  are  carried  into  immediate  effect  by  force.  The  former  may  lead 
to  a  change  in  the  legislative  expression  of  the  general  will — possibly,  to  a 
change  in  the  opinion  of  the  judiciary;  the  latter  enforces  the  general  will, 
whilst  that  will  and  that  opinion  continue  unchanged. 

And  if  there  be  no  impropriety  in  declaring  the  unconstitutionality  of  pro- 
ceedings in  the  Federal  Government,  where  can  be  the  impropriety  of  com- 
municating the  declaration  to  other  States,  and  inviting  their  concurrence  in 
a  like  declaration  ?  What  is  allowable  for  one  must  be  allowable  for  all ;  and 
a  free  communication  among  the  States,  where  the  Constitution  imposes  no 
restraint,  is  as  allowable  among  the  State  governments  as  among  other  public 
bodies  or  private  citizens.  This  consideration  derives  a  weight  that  cannot  be 
denied  to  it,  from  the  relation  of  the  State  Legislatures  to  the  Federal  Legisla- 
ture as  the  immediate  constituents  of  one  of  its  branches. 

The  Legislatures  of  the  States  have  a  right  also  to  originate  amendments  to 
the  Constitution,  by  a  concurrence  of  two-thirds  of  the  whole  number,  in  appli- 
cations to  Congress  for  the  purpose.  When  new  States  are  to  be  formed  by  a 
junction  of  two  or  more  States,  or  parts  of  States,  the  Legislatures  of  the  States 
concerned  are,  as  well  as  Congress,  to  concur  in  the  measure.  The  States  have 
a  right  also  to  enter  into  agreements  or  compacts,  with  the  consent  of  Con- 
gress. In  all  such  cases  a  communication  among  them  results  from  the  ob- 
ject which  is  common  to  them. 

It  is,  lastly,  to  be  seen  whether  the  confidence  expressed  by  the  resolution, 
that  the  necessary  and  proper  measures  would  be  taken  by  the  other  States  for 
co-operating  with  Virginia  in  maintaining  the  rights  reserved  to  the  States  or 


554  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1799—1800. 

to  the  people,  be  in  any  degree  liable  to  the  objections  which  have  been  raised 
against  it. 

If  it  be  liable  to  objection  it  must  be  because  either  the  object  or  the  mean3 
are  objectionable. 

The  object  being  to  maintain  what  the  Constitution  has  ordained,  is  in  itself 
a  laudable  object. 

The  means  are  expressed  in  the  terms  "  the  necessary  and  proper  meas- 
ures." A  proper  object  was  to  be  pursued  by  means  both  necessary  aud 
proper. 

To  find  an  objection,  then,  it  must  be  shown  that  some  meaning  was  an- 
nexed to  these  general  terms  which  was  not  proper ;  and  for  this  purpose  either 
that  the  means  used  by  the  General  Assembly  were  an  example  of  improper 
means,  or  that  there  were  no  proper  means  to  which  the  terms  could  refer. 

In  the  example  given  by  the  State  of  declaring  the  Alien  and  Sedition 
Acts  to  be  unconstitutional,  and  of  communicating  the  declaration  to  other 
States,  no  trace  of  improper  means  has  appeared.  And  if  the  other  States  had 
concurred  in  making  a  like  declaration,  supported,  too,  by  the  numerous  appli- 
cations flowing  immediately  from  the  people,  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that 
these  simple  means  would  have  been  as  sufficient  as  they  are  unexceptionable. 

It  is  no  less  certain,  that  other  means  might  have  been  employed  which  are 
strictly  within  the  limits  of  the  Constitution.  The  Legislatures  of  the  States 
might  have  made  a  direct  representation  to  Congress  with  a  view  to  obtain  a 
rescinding  of  the  two  offensive  acts  ;  or  they  might  have  represented  to  their 
respective  Senators  in  Congress  their  wish  that  two-thirds  thereof  would  pro- 
pose an  explanatory  amendment  to  the  Constitution;  or  two-thirds  of  them- 
selves, if  such  had  been  their  option,  might,  by  an  application  to  Congress, 
have  obtained  a  Convention  for  the  same  object. 

These  several  means,  though  nut  equally  eligible  in  themselves,  nor,  prob- 
ably, to  the  States,  were  all  constitutionally  open  for  consideration.  And  if  the 
General  Assembly,  after  declaring  the  two  acts  to  be  unconstitutional,  the  first 
and  most  obvious  proceeding  on  the  subject,  did  not  undertake  to  point  out  to 
the  other  States  a  choice  among  the  farther  measures  that  might  become  ne- 
cessary and  proper,  the  reserve  will  not  be  misconstrued  by  liberal  minds  into 
any  culpable  imputation. 

These  observations  appear  to  form  a  satisfactory  reply  to  every  objection 
which  is  not  founded  on  a  misconception  of  the  terms  employed  in  the  resolu- 
tions. There  is  one  other,  however,  which  may  be  of  too  much  importance  not 
to  be  added.  It  cannot  be  forgotten,  that  among  the  arguments  addressed  to 
those  who  apprehend  danger  to  liberty  from  the  establishment  of  the  Gen- 
eral Government  over  so  great  a  country,  the  appeal  was  emphatically  made 
to  the  intermediate  existence  of  the  State  governments,  between  the  people'  and 
that  Government;  to  the  vigilance  with  which  they  would  descry  the  firsl  symp- 
toms of  usurpation ;  and  to  the  promptitude  with  which  they  would  sound  the 


1799—1800.  VIRGINIA    PROCEEDINGS.  555 

alarm  to  the  public.  This  argument  was  probably  not  without  its  effect ;  and 
if  it  was  a  proper  one  then  to  recommend  the  establishment  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, it  must  he  a  proper  one  now  to  asssist  in  its  interpretation. 

The  only  part  of  the  two  concluding  resolutions  that  remains  to  be  noticed 
is,  the  repetition,  in  the  first,  of  that  warm  affection  to  the  Union  and  its  mem- 
bers,  and  of  that  scrupulous  fidelity  to  the  Constitution,  which  have  been  inva- 
riably felt  by  the  people  of  this  State.  As  the  proceedings  were  introduced 
with  these  sentiments,  they  could  not  be  more  properly  closed  than  in  the  same 
manner.  Should  there  be  any  so  far  misled  as  to  call  in  question  the  sincerity 
of  these  professions,  whatever  regret  may  be  excited  by  the  error,  the  General 
Assembly  cannot  descend  into  a  discussion  of  it.  Those  who  have  listened  to 
the  suggestion  can  only  be  left  to  their  own  recollection  of  the  part  which  this 
State  has  borne  in  the  establishment  of  our  National  Independence,  in  the 
establishment  of  our  National  Constitution,  and  in  maintaining  under  it 
the  authority  and  laws  of  the  Union,  without  a  single  exception  of  internal 
insistence  or  commotion.  By  recurring  to  these  facts  they  will  be  able  to  con- 
vince themselves  that  the  Representatives  of  the  people  of  Virginia  must 
be  .  above  the  necessity  of  opposing  any  other  shield  to  attacks  on  their 
national  patriotism  than  their  own  conscientiousness  and  the  justice  of  an 
enlightened  public,  who  will  perceive  in  the  resolutions  themselves  the  strong- 
est evidence  of  attachment  both  to  the  Constitution  and  to  the  Union,  since  it 
is  only  by  maintaining  the  different  governments  and  departments  within  their 
respective  limits  that  the  blessings  of  either  can  be  perpetuated. 

The  extensive  view  of  the  subject  thus  taken  by  the  committee  has  led  them 
to  report  to  the  House,  as  the  result  of  the  whole,  the  following  Resolution : 

Resolved,  That  the  General  Assembly  having  carefully  and  respectfully  attended  to  the  proceed- 
ings of  a  number  of  the  States,  in  answer  to  their  resolutions  of  December  21, 1798,  and  having 
accurately  and  fully  re-examined  aud  reconsidered  the  latter,  find  it  to  be  their  indispensable  duty 
to  adhere  to  the  same,  as  founded  in  truth,  as  consonant  with  the  Constitution,  and  as  conducive 
to  its  preservation  ;  and  more  especially  to  be  their  duty  to  renew,  as  they  do  hereby  renew,  their 
protest  against  "  the  Alien  and  Sedition  Acts  "  as  pa  lpable  and  alarming  infractions  of  the  Consti- 
tution. 


LETTERS,    ETC. 


TO    HENRY   CLAY. 

Montpelliee,  August  30,  1816. 
Dear  Sir, — Mr.  Dallas  seems  to  have  made  up  his  mind  to  retire  early  in 
October  from  the  Department  in  his  hands,  and  the  event  may  draw  after  it  a 
vacancy  in  the  War  Department.  Will  you  permit  me  to  avail  our  country 
of  your  services  in  the  latter?  It  will  be  convenient  to  know  your  determina- 
tion as  soon  as  you  have  formed  it,  and  it  will  be  particularly  gratifying  if  it 
assent  to  my  request. 


CORRESPONDENCE  WITH  THE  LEGISLATURE  OF  VIRGINIA. 

Council  Chamber,  Feb.  28,  1817. 

Sir, — By  a  resolution  of  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia,  it  becomes  the 
duty  of  the  Governor  to  transmit  to  you  the  enclosed  valedictory  address. 

In  the  discharge  of  this  duty  it  is  natural  for  me  to  reflect  on  the  astonish- 
ing contrast  which  this  moment  presents,  compared  with  the  eventful  period 
of  your  administration.  For  a  time  our  commerce  was  annihilated,  our  sacred 
rights  abused,  invaded  and  destroyed,  our  citizens  impressed  and  held  in 
bleeding  bondage,  and  even  our  national  sovereignty  insulted  and  despised. 
Now  we  are  remunerated  by  an  overwhelming  commerce,  our  rights  inviolate, 
our  citizens  free  and  happy,  respected  at  home  and  abroad,  and  our  national 
character  gloriously  exalted.  That  you  should  have  occupied  the  highest  sta- 
tion and  presided  over  the  Union  during  this  wonderful  march  of  national 
prosperity  and  glory,  can  never  cease  to  afford  you  the  highest  gratification. 
There  is  not  a  citizen,  or  soldier,  or  sailor,  who,  by  his  devotion  to  his  country, 
has  contributed  in  the  smallest  degree  to  this  happy  era,  who  will  not  hereafter 
repose  upon  the  retrospect  with  joy  and  delight. 

In  this  renewed  evidence  of  approbation  from  the  General  Assembly  of  Vir- 
ginia in  behalf  of  the  good  people  of  your  native  State,  at  the  close  of  your 
public  labors,  which  so  happily  terminates  an  administration  that  was  environed 
with  all  the  difficulties  of  an  untried  Government,  a  want  of  unanimity  in  the 
public  councils,  embarrassed  finances,  and  a  war  with  a  powerful  people,  who 


1817.  CORRESPONDENCE.  557 

disregarded  the  maxims  of  civilized  nations — under  all  these  circumstances, 
this  testimony  of  approbation,  next  to  an  approving  conscience,  must  be  to  a 
public  servant  the  best  reward  and  highest  consolation  ;  and  that  you  may  long 
live  to  enjoy  it  uninterruptedly  is  the  sincere  wish  of  your  obedient,  humble 
servant, 

JAMES  P.  PRESTON. 
His  Excellency  James  Madison,  President  of  the  United  States. 


Washington,  March  1,  1817. 

Dear  Sir, — Having  received,  through  you,  the  address  of  the  General  As- 
sembly of  Virginia,  of  February  10th,  I  have  to  request  that  you  will  take 
charge  of  the  enclosed  answer  to  it.  I  must  tender  you  my  acknowledgments 
at  the  same  time,  for  the  friendly  and  flattering  manner  in  which  you  have 
fulfilled  the  resolution  of  the  General  Assembly. 

I  should  express  my  feelings  very  imperfectly,  if,  in  recurring  to  the  events 
which  led  to  the  present  enviable  condition  of  our  country,  I  did  not  avow  my 
admiration  and  profound  gratitude  for  that  series  of  brilliant  achievements 
which  distinguish  the  American  arms,  and  offer  my  congratulations  on  the 
reward  so  dear  to  honorable  and  virtuous  minds,  which  you  have  received  for 
the  part  you  bore  in  them,  in  the  suffrages  which  elevated  you  to  the  import- 
ant station  which  you  fill. 

Be  pleased  to  accept  assurances  of  my  esteem  and  cordial  respect. 

JAMES  MADISON. 

Governor  Preston. 

TO   THE    GENERAL    ASSEMBLY    OF    VIRGINIA. 

Washington,  March  1,  1817. 

I  have  received,  fellow-citizens,  from  Governor  Preston,  your  address  of  the 
22d  ultimo.  The  sentiments  which  it  conveys  are  particularly  endeared  to  me, 
as  being  those  of  a  State  with  which  I  am  connected  by  the  ties  of  my  birth, 
and  of  my  home,  and  by  the  recollections  of  its  confidence  and  partiality,  com- 
mencing at  an  early  stage  of  my  life,  and  continued  under  different  public 
manifestations,  to  the  moment  of  my  final  return  to  the  station  of  a  private  citi- 
zen. The  language  of  the  address  derives  a  further  value  from  the  high  char- 
acter which  the  State  of  Virginia  has  justly  acquired  by  its  uniform  devotion 
to  free  Government,  and  by  a  constancy  and  zeal  in  maintaining  the  national 
rights,  which  no  sufferings  or  sacrifices  could  impair.  Nor  can  I  be  insensible 
to  the  consideration,  that  this  expression  of  kindness  and  approbation  comes 
at  the  close  of  my  public  career  through  a  period  of  uncommon  difficulties  and 
embarrassments. 

A  candid  review  of  the  entire  period,  of  which  that  made  a  part,  will  always 


bbl 


WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1822. 


do  justice  to  the  course  of  policy  which,  under  peculiar  circumstances  not 
likely  to  recur,  was  sanctioned  by  the  national  voice  and  pursued  by  the  Na- 
tional Councils.  The  review  will  show  that  the  obstinate  rivalship  of  powerful 
nations  in  trampling  on  our  dearest  rights  and  dearest  interests,  left  no  option 
but  between  insistence  and  degradation ;  that  a  love  of  peace  and  a  hope  of 
justice  selected  every  mode  of  resistence  short  of  war,  in  preference  to  war; 
that  although  the  appeals  made  to  the  commercial  interests  and  the  mutual 
jealousies  of  the  contending  parties  was,  at  length,  not  without  effect  in  pro- 
ducing a  relinquishment  of  the  aggressive  system,  even  by  the  Power  against 
which  war  was  declared,  and  before  the  declaration,  yet  the  relinquishment 
was  at  too  late  a  day  to  prevent  the  war ;  that  it  is  strictly  true,  therefore,  that 
this  last  resort  was  not  made  until  the  last  hope  had  been  extinguished,  that 
a  prostration  of  the  national  character  and  of  the  national  rights  could  be 
otherwise  avoided.  It  is  on  record,  also,  that  not  a  moment  was  lost  after  the 
sword  was  drawn  in  opening  the  way  to  reconciliation  ;  nor  an  opportunity  per- 
mitted by  self-respect,  untried,  till  it  was  at  length  restored  to  the  scabbard, 
where  it  now  happily  remains. 

On  the  prosperous  condition  of  our  country,  which  has  succeeded  a  conflict 
rendered  peculiarly  severe  and  peculiarly  glorious,  by  contingent  events  as 
flattering  to  our  adversaries  as  they  were  unlooked  for  by  either  party,  I  cor- 
dially unite  in  your  congratulations,  as  well  as  in  the  hope  that  all  the  lessons 
afforded  by  the  past  may  contribute  to  the  future  security  and  increase  of  the 
blessings  we  now  enjoy. 

Through  the  remaining  days  of  a  life  hitherto  employed,  with  little  inter- 
mission, in  the  public  service,  which  you  so  much  overvalue,  my  heart  will 
cherish  the  affectionate  sentiments  which  the  representatives  of  my  native 
State  have  addressed  me,  and  will  offer  its  fervent  prayers  for  the  public  pros- 
perity and  individual  happiness  of  its  citizens. 

JAMES  MADISON. 


[Pub.  in  Madison  Papers,  I.  xix — xxii.     App.  No.  4.] 
NAVIGATION  OF  THE  MISSISSIPPI. 

TO   MR.    NILBS. 

Montpei.lier,  January  8.  1822. 

In  Ramsay's  History  of  the  American  Revolution,  vol.  2,  p.  300,  301,  is  the 
following  passage : 

"Mr.  Jay  was  instructed  to  contend  for  the  right  of  the  United  States  to  the 
free  navigation  of  the  river  Mississippi  ;  and,  if  an  express  acknowledgment 
of  it  could  not  be  obtained,  he  was  restrained  from  acceding  to  any  stipula- 
tion by  which  k  should  be  relinquished.  But,  in  February,  1781,  when  Lord 
Cornwallis  was  making  rapid  progress  in  overrunning  the  Southern  States, 


1822.  NAVIGATION    OF    THE    MISSISSIPPI.  559 

and  when  the  mutiny  of  the  Pennsylvania  line  and  other  unfavorable  circum- 
stances depressed  the  spirits  of  the  Americans,  Congress,  on  the  recommenda- 
tion of  Virginia,  directed  him  to  recede  from  his  instructions,  so  far  as  they 
insist  on  the  free  navigation  of  that  part  of  the  Mississippi  which  lies  below 
the  thirty -first  degree  of  north  latitude  ;  provided  such  concession  should  be 
unalterably  insisted  on  by  Spain,  and  provided  the  free  navigation  of  the  said 
river  above  the  said  degree  of  north  latitude  should  be  acknowledged  and 
guarantied  by  his  Catholic  Majesty,  in  common  with  his  own  subject." 

In  this  account  of  the  instruction  to  Mr.  Jay  to  relinquish  the  navigation 
of  the  Mississippi,  below  the  southern  boundary  of  the  United  States,  the 
measure  would  seem  to  have  had  its  origin  with  the  State  of  Virginia. 

This  was  not  the  case ;  and  the  very  worthy  historian,  who  was  not  at  that 
period  a  member  of  Congress,  was  led  into  his  error  by  the  silence  of  the  jour- 
nals as  to  what  had  passed  on  the  subject  previous  to  February  15th,  1781, 
when  they  agreed  to  the  instruction  to  make  the  relinquishment,  as  moved  by 
the  delegates  of  Virginia,  in  pursuance  of  instructions  from  the  Legislature. 
It  was  not  unusual  with  the  Secretary  of  Congress  to  commence  his  entries  on 
the  journal,  with  the  stage  in  which  the  proceedings  assumed  a  definitive 
character  ;  omitting,  or  noting  on  separate  and  informal  sheets  only,  the  pre- 
liminary steps. 

The  delegates  from  Virginia  had  been  long  under  instructions  from  their 
State  to  insist  on  the  right  of  the  navigation  of  the  Mississippi,  and  Congress 
bad  always  included  it  in  their  ultimatum  for  peace.  As  late  as  the  4th  of  Octo- 
ber, 1781,  [see  the  secret  journals  of  that  date,]  they  had  renewed  their  ad- 
herence to  this  point  by  unanimously  agreeing  to  the  report  of  a  committee, 
to  whom  had  been  referred  "  certain  instructions  to  the  delegates  of  Virginia  by 
their  constituents,  and  a  letter  of  May  29  from  Mr.  Jay,  at  Madrid,"  which  re- 
port prohibited  him  from  relinquishing  the  right  of  the  United  States  to  the 
free  navigation  of  the  river  Mississippi,  into  and  from  the  sea,  as  asserted  in 
his  former  instructions ;  and,  on  the  17th  of  the  same  month,  October,  [see 
the  secret  journals  of  that  date,]  Congress  agreed  to  the  report  of  a  committee 
explaining  the  reasons  and  principles  on  which  the  instructions  of  October 
the  4th  were  founded, 

Shortly  after  this  last  measure  of  Congress,  the  delegates  of  South  Carolina 
and  Georgia,  seriously  affected  by  the  progress  and  views  of  the  enemy  in  the 
Southern  States,  and  by  the  possibility  that  the  interference  of  the  great  neu- 
tral Powers  might  force  a  peace,  on  the  principle  of  uti  possidetis,  whilst  those 
States,  or  parts  of  them,  might  be  in  the  military  occupaucy  of  Great  Britain, 
urged  with  great  zeal,  within  and  without  doors,  the  expediency  of  giving  fresh 
vigor  to  the  means  of  driving  the  enemy  out  of  their  country,  by  drawing 
Spain  into  an  alliance,  and  into  pecuniary  succours,  believed  to  be  unattainable 
without  yielding  our  claim  to  the  navigation  of  the  Mississippi.  The  efforts 
of  those  delegates  did  not  fail  to  make  proselytes  till,  at  length,  it  was  ascer- 


5(30  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1822. 

tained  that  a  number  was  disposed  to  vote  for  the  measure,  sufficient  without 
the  vote  of  Virginia,  and  it  happened  that  one  of  the  two  delegates  from  that 
State  concurred  in  the  policy  of  what  was  proposed.  [See  the  annexed  letter 
of  November  25,  and  extract  of  December  5,  1780,  from  J.  Madison  to  Joseph 
Jones.] 

In  this  posture  of  the  business,  Congress  was  prevailed  on  to  postpone  any 
final  decision  until  the  Legislature  of  Virginia  could  be  consulted ;  it  being 
regarded  by  all  as  very  desirable,  when  the  powers  of  Congress  depended  so 
much  on  the  individual  wills  of  the  States,  that  an  important  member  of  the 
Union,  on  a  point  particularly  interesting  to  it,  should  receive  every  concilia- 
tory mark  of  respect,  and  it  being  calculated,  also,  that  a  change  in  the  coun- 
cils of  that  State  might  have  been  produced  by  the  causes  producing  it  in 
others. 

A  joint  letter,  bearing  date  December  13,  1780,  [which  see  annexed,]  was 
accordingly  written  by  the  delegates  of  Virginia  to  Governor  Jefferson,  to  be 
laid  before  the  Legislature  then  in  session,  simply  stating  the  case  and  asking 
instructions  on  the  subject,  without  any  expression  of  their  own  opinions, 
which,  being  at  variance,  could  not  be  expressed  in  a  letter  to  be  signed  by 
both. 

The  result  of  these  communications  from  the  delegates  was  a  repeal  of  the 
former  instructions,  and  a  transmission  of  different  ones  ;  the  receipt  of  which, 
according  to  an  understanding  when  the  decision  of  Congress  was  postponed, 
made  it  incumbent  on  the  two  delegates  to  bring  the  subject  before  Congress. 
This  they  did  by  offering  the  instruction  to  Mr.  Jay,  agreed  to  on  the  15th  of 
February,  1781,  and  referred  to  in  the  historical  passage  above  cited. 

It  is  proper  to  add,  that  the  instant  the  menacing  crisis  was  over,  the  Legis- 
lature of  Virginia  revoked  the  instruction  to  her  delegates  to  cede  the  naviga- 
tion of  the  Mississippi ;  and  that  Congress  seized  the  first  moment,  also,  for 
revoking  theirs  to  Mr.  Jay. 

I  have  thought  a  statement  of  these  circumstances  due  to  truth.  And  that 
its  accuracy  may  be  seen  to  depend,  not  on  memory  alone,  the  copies  of  co- 
temporary  documents  verifying  it  are  annexed. 

In  the  hope  that  this  explanation  may  find  its  way  to  the  notice  of  some 
future  historian  of  our  revolutionary  transactions,  I  request  for  it  a  place,  if 
one  can  be  afforded,  in  your  Register,  where  it  may  more  readily  offer  it- 
self to  his  researches,  than  in  publications  of  more  transient  or  miscellaneous 
contents. 

With  friendly  respects, 

JAMES  MADISON. 


1780.  NAVIGATION    OF    THE    MISSISSIPPI.  501 

[copy.] 

Philadelphia,  Nov.  25,  1780. 

Dear  Sir, — I  informed  you  some  time  ago  that  the  instructions  to  Mr.  Jay 
had  passed  Congress,  in  a  form  which  was  entirely  to  my  mind.  I  since  in- 
formed you  that  a  committee  was  preparing  a  letter  to  him,  explanatory  of  the 
principles  and  objects  of  the  instructions.  This  letter  also  passed  in  a  form 
equally  satisfactory.  I  did  not  suppose  that  anything  further  would  be  done 
on  the  subject;  at  least,  until  further  intelligence  should  arrive  from  Mr.  Jay. 
It  now  appears  that  I  was  mistaken.  The  delegates  from  Georgia  and  South 
Carolina,  apprehensive  that  a  uti  possidetis  may  be  obtruded  on  the  belliger- 
ent Powers  by  the  armed  neutrality  in  Europe,  and  hoping  that  the  accession 
of  Spain  to  the  alliance  will  give  greater  concert  and  success  to  the  military 
operations  that  may  be  pursued  for  the  recovery  of  their  States,  and  likewise 
add  weight  to  the  means  that  may  be  used  for  obviating  a  uti  possidetis,  have 
moved  for  a  reconsideration  of  the  instructions,  in  order  to  empower  Mr.  Jay, 
in  case  of  necessity,  to  yield  to  the  claims  of  Spain  on  condition  of  her  guar- 
antying our  independence  and  affording  us  a  handsome  subsidy.  The  expe- 
diency of  such  a  motion  is  further  urged  from  the  dangerous  negotiations  now 
on  foot,  by  British  emissaries,  for  detaching  Spain  from  the  war.  Wednesday 
last  was  assigned  for  the  consideration  of  this  motion,  and  it  has  continued  the 
order  of  the  day  ever  since,  without  being  taken  up.  What  the  fate  of  it  will 
be  I  do  not  predict;  but  whatever  its  own  fate  may  be,  it  must  do  mischief  in 
its  operation.  It  will  not  probably  be  concealed  that  such  a  motion  has  been 
made  and  supported,  and  the  weight  which  our  demands  would  derive  from 
unanimity  and  decision  must  be  lost.  I  flatter  myself,  however,  that  Congress 
will  see  the  impropriety  of  sacrificing  the  acknowledged  limits  and  claims  of 
any  State,  without  the  express  concurrence  of  such  State.  Obstacles  enough 
will  be  thrown  in  the  way  of  peace,  if  it  is  to  be  bid  for  at  the  expense  of  partic- 
ular members  of  the  Union.  The  Eastern  States  must,  on  the  first  suggestion, 
take  the  alarm  for  their  fisheries.  If  they  will  not  support  other  States  in  their 
rights,  they  cannot  expect  to  be  supported  themselves  when  theirs  come  into 
question. 

In  this  important  business,  which  so  deeply  affects  the  claims  and  interests 
of  Virginia,  and  which  I  know  she  has  so  much  at  heart,  I  have  not  the  satis- 
faction to  harmonize  in  sentiments  with  my  colleague.  He  has  embraced  an 
opinion  that  we  have  no  just  claim  to  the  subject  in  controversy  between  us 
and  Spain,  and  that  it  is  the  interest  of  Virginia  not  to  adhere  to  it.  Under 
this  impression,  he  drew  up  a  letter  to  the  Executive  to  be  communicated  to 
the  Legislature,  stating,  in  general,  the  difficulty  Congress  might  be  under, 
and  calling  their  attention  to  a  revision  of  their  instructions  to  their  Dele- 
gates on  the  subject.  I  was  obliged  to  object  to  such  a  step,  and,  in  order  to 
prevent  it,  observed,  that  the  instructions  were  given  by  the  Legislature  of 

vol.  iv.  36 


562  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1780. 

Virginia  on  mature  consideration  of  the  case,  and  on  a  supposition  that  Spain 
would  make  the  demands  she  has  done ;  that  no  other  event  has  occurred  to 
change  the  mind  of  our  constituents  but  the  armed  neutrality  in  Europe  and 
the  successes  of  the  enemy  to  the  southward,  which  are  as  well  known  to  them 
as  to  ourselves  ;  that  we  might  every  moment  expect  a  third  Delegate  here, 
who  would  either  adjust  or  decide  the  difference  in  opinion  between  us,  and 
that  whatever  went  from  the  delegation  would  then  go  in  its  proper  form  and 
have  its  proper  effect ;  that  if  the  instructions  from  Virginia  were  to  be  re- 
vised, and  their  ultimatum  reduced,  it  could  not  be  concealed  in  so  populous 
an  assembly,  and  everything  which  our  minister  should  be. authorized  to  yield 
would  be  insisted  on ;  that  Mr.  Jay's  last  despatches  encouraged  us  to  expect 
that  Spain  would  not  be  inflexible  if  we  were  so ;  that  we  might  every  day  ex- 
pect to  have  more  satisfactory  information  from  him ;  that,  finally,  if  it  should 
be  thought  expedient  to  listen  to  the  pretensions  of  Spain,  it  would  be  best,  be- 
fore we  took  any  decisive  step  in  the  matter,  to  take  the  counsel  of  those  who 
best  know  the  interests,  and  have  the  greatest  influence  on  the  opinions,  of  our 
constituents ;  that,  as  you  were  both  a  member  of  Congress  and  of  the  Legis- 
lature, and  were  now  with  the  latter,  you  would  be  an  unexceptionable  medium 
for  effecting  this ;  and  that  I  would  Write  to  you  for  the  purpose  by  the  first 
safe  conveyance. 

These  objections  had  not  the  weight  with  my  colleague  which  they  had  with 
me.  He  adhered  to  his  first  determination,  and  has,  I  believe,  sent  the  letter 
above  mentioned  by  Mr.  Walker,  who  will,  I  suppose,  soon  forward  it  to  the 
Governor.  You  will  readily  conceive  the  embarrassments  this  affair  must 
have  cost  me.  All  I  have  to  ask  of  you  is,  that  if  my  refusing  to  concur  with 
my  colleague  in  recommending  to  the  Legislature  a  revision  of  their  instruc- 
tions should  be  misconstrued  by  any,  you  will  be  so  good  as  to  place  it  in  its 
true  light ;  and  if  you  agree  with  me  as  to  the  danger  of  giving  express  power 
to  concede,  or  the  inexpediency  of  conceding  at  all,  that  you  will  consult  with 
gentlemen  of  the  above  description  and  acquaint  me  with  the  result. 

I  need  not  observe  to  you  that  the  alarms  with  respect  to  the  inflexibility 
of  Spain  in  her  demands,  the  progress  of  British  intrigues  at  Madrid,  and  the 
danger  of  a  uti  possidetis,  may,  with  no  small  probability,  be  regarded  as  arti- 
fices for  securing  her  objects  on  the  Mississippi.  Mr.  Adams,  in  a  late  letter 
from  Amsterdam,  a  copy  of  which  has  been  enclosed  to  the  Governor,  supposes 
that  the  pretended  success  of  the  British  emissaries  at  Madrid  is  nothing  but  a 
ministerial  finesse  to  facilitate  the  loans  and  keep  up  the  spirits  of  the  people. 

This  will  be  conveyed  by  Col.  Grayson,  who  has  promised  to  deliver  it  him- 
self; or  if  anything  unforeseen  should  prevent  his  going  to  Richmond,  to  put 
it  into  such  hands  as  will  equally  insure  its  safe  delivery. 

I  am,  dear  sir,  yours,  sincerely, 

J.  MADISON,  Jr. 

The  Hon.  Joseph  Jokes. 


1780.  NAVIGATION    OF    THE    MISSISSIPPI.  553 

Extract  of  a  letter  from  James  Madison  to  Joseph  Jones,  dated  December 

roth,  1780. 

"  We  had  letters  yesterday  from  Mr.  Jay  and  Mr.  Carniichael,  as  late  as  the 
4th  and  9th  of  September.  Mr.  Jay  informs  us  that  it  is  absolutely  necessary 
to  cease  drawing  bills  on  him ;  that  150,000  dollars,  to  be  repaid  in  three 
years,  with  some  aid  in  clothing,  &c,  is  all  that  the  court  will  adventure  for 
us.  The  general  tenor  of  the  letter  is,  that  our  affairs  there  make  little  pro- 
gress ;  that  the  court  is  rather  backward  ;  that  the  navigation  of  the  Missis- 
sippi is  likely  to  prove  a  very  serious  difficulty ;  that  Spain  has  herself  been 
endeavoring  to  borrow  a  large  sum  in  France,  on  which  she  meant  to  issue  a 
paper  currency ;  that  the  terms  and  means  used  by  her  displeased  Mr.  Neckar, 
who,  in  consequence,  threw  such  discouragements  on  it,  as,  in  turn,  were  not 
very  pleasing  to  the  Spanish  minister;  that  Mr.  Cumberland  is  still  at  Madrid, 
laboring,  in  concert  with  other  secret  emissaries  of  Britain,  to  give  unfavorable 
impressions  of  our  affairs ;  that  he  is  permitted  to  keep  up  a  correspondence 
by  his  couriers  with  London  ;  that  if  negotiations  for  peace  should  be  insti- 
tuted this  winter,  as  Spain  has  not  yet  taken  a  decided  part  with  regard  to 
America,  England  will  probably  choose  to  make  Madrid,  rather  than  Ver- 
sailles, the  seat  of  it.  However  unfavorable  many  of  these  particulars  may 
appear,  it  is  the  concuirent  representation  of  the  above  miuisters  that  our 
disappointment  of  pecuniary  succor  at  Madrid  is  to  be  imputed  to  the  want 
of  ability,  and  not  of  inclination,  to  supply  us;  that  the  steadiness  of  his  Cath- 
olic Majesty  is  entirely  confided  in  by  the  French  ambassador;  and  that  the 
mysterious  conduct  of  Mr.  Cumberland,  and  of  the  court  of  Spain  towards  him, 
seems  to  excite  no  uneasiness  in  the  ambassador.  The  letters  add,  that,  on 
the  pressing  remonstrance  of  France  and  Spain,  Portugal  had  agreed  to  shut 
her  ports  against  English  prizes,  but  that  she  persisted  in  her  refusal  to  accede 
to  the  armed  neutrality. 

"  The  receipt  of  the  foregoing  intelligence  has  awakened  the  attention  of  the 
Georgia  delegates  to  their  motion,  of  which  I  informed  you  particularly  by 
Col.  Grayson.  It  has  lain  ever  since  it  was  made  undisturbed  on  the  table. 
This  morning  is  assigned  for  the  consideration  of  it,  and  I  expect  it  will,  with- 
out fail,  be  taken  up.  I  do  not  believe  Congress  will  adopt  it  without  the  ex- 
press concurrence  of  all  the  States  immediately  interested.  Both  my  princi- 
ples and  my  instructions  will  determine  me  to  oppose  it.  Virginia  and  the 
United  States  in  general  are  too  deeply  interested  in  the  subject  of  contro- 
versy to  give  it  up  as  long  as  there  is  a  possibility  of  retaining  it.  And  I  have 
ever  considered  the  mysterious  and  reserved  behaviour  of  Spain,  particularly 
her  backwardness  in  the  article  of  money,  as  intended  to  alarm  us  into  con- 
cessions rather  than  as  the  effect  of  a  real  indifference  to  our  fate,  or  to  an 
alliance  with  us.  I  am  very  anxious,  notwithstanding,  to  have  an  answer  to 
my  letter  by  Grayson." 


564  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1826. 

[copy.] 

Philadelphia,  December  13th,  1780. 
His  Excellency  Thomas  Jefferson,  Esq.,  Governor  of  Virginia  : 

Sib, — The  complexion  of  the  intelligence  received  of  late  from  Spain,  with 
the  manner  of  thinking  which  begins  to  prevail  in  Congress,  with  regard  to 
the  claims  to  the  navigation  of  the  Mississippi,  makes  it  our  duty  to  apply  to 
our  constituents  for  their  precise,  full,  and  ultimate  sense  on  this  point.  If 
Spain  should  make  a  relinquishment  of  the  navigation  of  that  river  on  the 
part  of  the  United  States  an  indispensable  condition  of  an  alliance  with  them, 
and  the  State  of  Virginia  should  adhere  to  their  former  determination  to  in- 
sist on  the  right  of  navigation,  their  delegates  ought  to  be  so  instructed ;  not 
only  for  their  own  satisfaction,  but  that  they  may  the  more  effectually  obviate 
arguments  drawn  from  a  supposition  that  the  change  of  circumstances,  which 
has  taken  place  since  the  former  instructions  were  given,  may  have  changed 
the  opinion  of  Virginia  with  regard  to  the  object  of  them.  If,  on  the  other 
side,  any  such  change  of  opinion  should  have  happened,  and  it  is  now  the 
sense  of  the  State  that  an  alliance  with  Spain  ought  to  be  purchased,  even  at 
the  price  of  such  a  cession,  if  it  cannot  be  obtained  on  better  terms,  it  is  evi- 
dently necessary  that  we  should  be  authorized  to  concur  in  it.  It  will  also  be 
expedient  for  the  Legislature  to  instruct  us  in  the  most  explicit  terms  whether 
any,  and  what  extent  of  territory,  on  the  east  side  of  the  Mississippi  and 
within  the  limits  of  Virginia,  is,  in  any  event,  to  be  yielded  to  Spain  as  the 
price  of  an  alliance  with  her.  Lastly,  it  is  our  earnest  wish  to  know  what 
steps  it  is  the  pleasure  of  our  constituents  we  should  take  in  case  we  should 
be  instructed  in  no  event  to  concede  the  claims  of  Virginia,  either  to  territory 
or  to  the  navigation  of  the  above-mentioned  river,  and  Congress  should,  with- 
out their  concurrence,  agree  to  such  concession. 

We  have  made  use  of  the  return  of  the  honorable  Mr.  Jones  to  North  Caro- 
lina to  transmit  this  to  your  Excellency,  and  we  request  that  you  will  imme- 
diately communicate  it  to  the  General  Assembly. 

We  have  the  honor  to  be,  with  the  most  perfect  respect  and  esteem,  your 
Excellency's  most  obedient  and  humble  servants, 

JAMES  MADISON,  Jcnr. 
THEO'K  BLAND. 


TO   ROGER   C.   WEIGHTMAN,   MAYOR    OF   WASHINGTON,   AND    CHAIRMAN   OF    THE 
COMMITTEE    OF    ARRANGEMENTS. 

Montpellikr,  June  20,  1826. 
Dear  Sir, — I  received,  by  yesterday's  mail,  your  letter  of  the  14  th,  inviting, 
in  the  name  of  the  Committee  of  Arrangements,  my  presence  at  the  relebra- 


1827.  LETTERS.  5G5 

tion  in  the  Metropolis  of  the  United  States  of  the  fiftieth  anniversary  of  Amer- 
ican Independence. 

I  am  deeply  sensible  of  what  I  owe  to  this  manifestation  of  respect  on  the 
part  of  the  committee ;  and  not  less  so  of  the  gratifications  promised  by  an 
opportunity  of  joining,  with  those  among  whom  I  should  find  myself,  in  com- 
memorating the  event  which  calls  forth  so  many  reflections  on  the  past,  and 
anticipations  of  the  future  career  of  our  country.  Allow  me  to  add,  that  the 
opportunity  would  derive  an  enhanced  value  from  the  pleasure  with  which  I 
should  witness  the  growing  prosperity  of  Washington  and  of  its  citizens,  whose 
kindness,  during  my  long  residence  among  them,  will  always  have  a  place  in 
my  grateful  recollections. 

With  impressions  such  as  these,  it  is  with  a  regret  readily  to  be  imagined 
that  I  am  constrained  to  decline  the  flattering  invitation  you  have  communi- 
cated. Besides  the  infirmities  incident  to  the  period  of  life  I  have  now  reached, 
there  is  an  instability  of  my  health  at  present  which  would  forbid  me  to  in- 
dulge my  wishes,  were  no  other  circumstance  unpropitious  to  them. 

This  explanation  will,  I  trust,  be  a  sufficient  pledge  that,  although  absent, 
all  my  feelings  will  be  in  sympathy  with  the  sentiments  inspired  by  the  occa- 
sion. Ever  honored  will  be  the  day  which  gave  birth  to  a  nation,  and  to  a 
system  of  self-government  making  it  a  new  epoch  in  the  history  of  man. 

Be  pleased  to  accept,  sir,  for  yourself  and  the  committee,  assurances  of  my 
respectful  consideration,  and  of  my  best  wishes. 

JAMES  MADISON. 


TO   HENRY   CLAY. 

Montpellier,  March  24, 1827. 

Dear  Sir, — After  your  kind  offer  I  make  no  apology  for  inclosing  another 
letter,  which  I  wish  to  have  the  advantage  of  a  conveyance  from  the  Depart- 
ment of  State.  Its  object  is  to  obtain  from  Mr.  Gallatin  a  small  service  for 
our  University,  and  that  with  as  little  delay  as  may  be. 

While  I  was  charged  with  the  Department  of  State,  the  British  doctrine 
against  a  neutral  trade  with  belligerent  ports,  shut  in  peace  and  open  in  war, 
was  examined  at  some  length,  and  the  examination  published  in  a  stout  pam- 
phlet. I  have  been  applied  to  by  several  friends  for  a  copy,  which  I  could  not 
furnish,  nor  do  I  know  that  they  are  attainable,  unless  obsolete  copies  should 
remain  in  the  Department.  If  this  be  the  ease,  I  should  be  thankful  for  the 
means  of  complying  with  the  application. 

Mrs.  Madison  joins  in  offering  to  Mrs.  Clay  and  yourself  assurances  of  cor- 
dial regards  and  best  wishes. 


566  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1832. 


TO   HENRY   CLAY. 

Montpellieb,  January  6,  1828. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  the  copy  of  your  Address  politely  for- 
warded to  me.  Although  I  have  taken  no  part  in  the  depending  contests,  and 
have  been  led  to  place  myself  publicly  on  that  ground,  I  could  not  peruse  the 
appeal  you  have  made  without  being  sensible  of  the  weight  of  testimony  it  ex- 
hibits, and  of  the  eloquence  by  which  it  is  distinguished. 

Having  occasion  to  write  to  Mr.  Brougham  *  on  a  subject  which  intergsts 
our  University,  I  take  the  liberty  of  asking  your  friendly  attention  to  the  let- 
ter which  I  inclose.  I  hope  it  may  find  an  early  conveyance  from  the  Depart- 
ment of  State,  with  despatches  about  to  be  destined  for  London.  Should 
this  not  be  the  case,  Mr.  Brent  will  save  you  the  trouble  of  giving  the  inti- 
mation, that  a  duplicate  may  seek  some  other  channel.  It  is  desirable  that 
the  letter  should  reach  Mr.  Brougham  with  as  little  delay  as  may  be. 


TO   HENRY   CLAY. 

Montpellier,  March  13,  1832 
J.  Madison,  with  his  best  respects  to  Mr.  Clay,  thanks  him  for  the  copy  of 
his  speech  <;in  defence  of  the  American  System,"  &c.  It  is  a  very  able,  a  very 
eloquent,  and  a  very  interesting  one.  If  it  does  not  establish  all  its  positions, 
in  all  their  extent,  it  demolishes  not  a  few  of  those  relied  on  by  the  opponents. 
J.  M.  feels  a  pleasure  in  offering  this  tribute  to  its  merits.  But  he  must  be 
pardoned  for  expressing  a  regret  that  an  effusion  of  personal  feeling  was,  iu 
one  instance,  admitted  into  the  discussion. 


CORRESPONDENCE   WITH    THE   VIRGINIA    NATIONAL   REPUBLICAN   STATE   CON- 
VENTION. 

At  the  late  session  of  the  Virginia  National  Republican  State  Convention  at 
Staunton,  among  other  proceedings,  the  following  resolutions  were  adopted : 

"  Resolved,  That  this  Convention  will  not  close  its  deliberations  without  a  unanimous  expression 
of  their  highest  approbation  of,  and  grateful  acknowledgments  to,  the  venerable  ex-President  James 
Madison,  of  Orange  county,  for  his  many  and  distinguished  services  to  his  country,  considering 
him  as  one  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Constitution,  the  faithful  expounder  of  that  instrument,  the  bene- 
factor of  mankind,  and  the  able  advocate  of  civil  liberty. 

" Resolved ,That  the  President  of  this  Convention  address  a  letter  to  Mr.  Madison,  and  tender  to  him 
the  respectful  consideration  of  this  Convention,  and  the  homage  of  their  best  wishes,  with  their 
united  hope  that  his  exemplary  life  may  be  preserved  to  enjoy  the  blessings  of  our  f*ee  Govern- 
ment, which  he,  in  so  emiueuta  degree,  contributed  to  establish. 

"  Resolved,  That  a  copy  of  these  resolutions  be  forwarded  in  said  communication." 

*  Since  Lord  Brougham. 


1833.  LETTERS.  567 

The  following  is  Mr.  Madison's  answer  to  the  letter  of  the  President  of  the 
Convention,  transmitting  him  copies  of  the  above  resolutions : 

Montpellier,  2Gth  July,  1832. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  duly  received  your  letter  communicating  the  resolutions 
in  which  "the  National  Republican  Convention  of  Virginia,  at  Staunton,"  has 
been  pleased  to  express  its  approbation  of  my  public  services,  and  its  kind 
wishes  for  my  personal  welfare.  I  cannot  be  insensible  to  the  value  I  ought 
to  place  on  opinions  so  favorable,  and  sentiments  so  friendly,  coming  from  a 
body  rendered  so  respectable  by  the  members  composing  it ;  and  I  tender  all 
the  acknowledgments  which  I  feel  to  be  due  from  me. 

If  it  was  my  lot  to  be  in  any  degree  instrumental  in  promoting  the  substi- 
tution of  our  present  Constitutional  system  for  the  inadequate  one  which  pre- 
ceded it,  my  participation  in  the  great  work,  conscious,  as  I  am,  of  its  being 
overrated  by  the  partiality  of  the  Convention,  could  not  fail  to  be  an  increasing 
source  of  gratifying  recollection,  as  the  fruits  of  the  change  have  been  signal- 
ized in  the  prosperity  of  our  country. 

For  the  obliging  terms  in  which  you  made  the  communication,  I  pray  you 
to  accept  my  thanks,  with  assurances  of  my  esteem  and  good  wishes. 

JAMES  MADISON. 

Charles  James  Faulkner,  Esq., 

President  of  the  National  Republican  Convention  of  Virginia. 


TO   HENRY  CLAY. 

Montpellier,  April  2,  1833. 

Dear  Sir, — Accept  my  acknowledgments  for  the  copy  of  your  speech  on 
the  bill  modifying  the  tariff.  I  need  not  repeat  what  is  said  by  all  on  the  abil- 
ity and  advantages  with  which  the  subject  was  handled.  It  has  certainly  had 
the  effect  of  an  anodyne  on  the  feverish  excitement  under  which  the  public 
mind  was  laboring ;  and  a  relapse  may  happily  not  ensue.  There  is  no  cer- 
tainty, however,  that  a  surplus  revenue  will  not  revive  the  difficulty  of  adjust- 
ing an  impost  to  the  claims  of  the  manufacturing  and  the  feelings  of  the  agri- 
cultural States.  The  effect  of  a  reduction,  including  the  protected  articles,  on 
the  manufacturers,  is  manifest ;  and  a  discrimination  in  their  favor  will,  be- 
sides the  complaint  of  inequality,  exhibit  the  protective  principle,  without 
disguise,  to  the  protesters  against  its  Constitutionality.  An  alleviation  of  the 
difficulty  may,  perhaps,  be  found  in  such  an  apportionment  of  the  tax  on  the 
protected  articles  most  consumed  in  the  South,  and  on  the  unprotected  most 
consumed  in  the  North,  as  will  equalize  the  burden  between  them  and  limit 
the  advantage  of  the  latter  to  the  benefits  flowing  from  a  location  of  the  man- 
ufacturing establishments. 

May  there  not  be  a  more  important  alleviation  in  embryo — an  assimilation 


568  WORKS    OF    MADISON.  1834. 

of  the  employ.  Bent  of  labor  in  the  South  to  its  employment  in  the  North?  A 
difference,  and  even  a  contrast,  in  that  respect,  is  at  the  bottom  of  the  discords 
which  have  prevailed,  and  would  so  continue,  until  the  manufacturers  of  the 
North  could,  without  a  bounty,  take  the  place  of  the  foreign  in  supplying  the 
South;  in  which  event,  the  source  of  discord  would  become  a  bond  of  interest, 
and  the  difference  of  pursuits  more  than  equivalent  to  a  similarity.  In  the 
mean  time,  an  advance  towards  the  latter  must  have  an  alleviating  tendency. 
And  does  not  this  advance  present  itself  in  the  certainty  that,  unless  agricul- 
ture can  find  new  markets  for  its  products,  or  new  products  for  its  markets, 
the  rapid  increase  of  slave  labor,  and  the  still  more  rapid  increase  of  its  fruits, 
must  divert  a  large  portion  of  it  from  the  plough  and  the  hoe  to  the  loom  and 
the  workshop?  When  we  can  no  longer  convert  our  flour,  tobacco,  cotton,  and 
rice  into  a  supply  of  our  habitual  wants  from  abroad,  labor  must  be  withdrawn 
from  those  articles  and  made  to  supply  them  at  home. 

It  is  painful  to  turn  from  anticipations  of  this  sort  to  the  prospect,  opened 
by  the  torch  of  discord,  bequeathed  by  the  Convention  of  South  Carolina  to  its 
country;  by  the  insidious  exhibitions  of  a  permanent  incompatibility  and  even 
hostility  of  interests  between  the  South  and  the  North;  and  by  the  contagious 
zeal  in  vindicating  and  varnishing  the  doctrines  of  nullification  and  secession ; 
the  tendency  of  all  of  which,  whatever  be  the  intention,  is  to  create  a  disgust  with 
the  Union,  and  then  to  open  the  way  out  of  it.  We  must  oppose  to  this  aspect 
of  things  confidence  that,  as  the  gulf  is  approached  the  deluded  will  recoil  from 
its  horrors,  and  that  the  deluders,  if  not  themselves  sufficiently  startled,  will  be 
abandoned  and  overwhelmed  by  their  followers. 

As  we  were  disappointed  of  the  expected  visit  last  fall  from  yourself  and 
Mrs.  Clay,  we  hope  the  promise  will  not  be  forgotten  when  the  next  oppor- 
tunity occurs.  For  the  present,  Mrs.  Madison  joins  in  cordial  regards  and  all 
good  wishes  to  you  both. 


[to  aaron  vail.] 

Feb.  3,  1834. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of was  duly  received,  and  the  enclosed 

paper  complies  with  the  request  which  it  makes.     With  friendly  respects  and 
good  wishes, 

J.  M. 

It  being  understood  that  an  autographic  specimen  from  me,  as  from  some 
others  of  my  countrymen,  would  be  acceptable  for  a  collection  which  the  Prin- 
cess Victoria  is  making,  these  few  lines,  with  my  signature,  though  written  at 
a  very  advauced  age  and  with  rheumatic  fingers,  are  offered  for  the  occasion. 
They  will  be  an  expression,  at  least,  of  the  respect  due  to  the  young  Princess, 


1835.  EXTRACT    FROM    WILL.  569 

who  is  understood  to  be  developing,  under  the  wise  counsels  of  her  august 
parent,  the  endowments  and  virtues  which  give  beauty  and  value  to  personal 
character,  and  are  auspicious  to  the  high  station  to  which  she  is  destine  1. 

JAMES  MADISON. 
Feb.  1,  1834. 


EXTRACT   FROM   MR.   MADISON'S   WILL,   DATED   APRIL   15,    1835. 

"  I  give  all  my  personal  estate  of  every  description,  ornamental  as  well  as 
useful,  except  as  hereinafter  otherwise  given,  to  my  dear  wife ;  and  I  also  give 
to  her  all  my  manuscript  papers,  having  entire  confidence  in  her  discreet  and 
proper  use  of  them,  but  subject  to  the  qualification  in  the  succeeding  clause. 
Considering  the  peculiarity  and  magnitude  of  the  occasion  which  produced 
the  Convention  at  Philadelphia  in  1787;  the  characters  who  composed  it;  the 
Constitution  which  resulted  from  their  deliberations ;  its  effects  during  a  trial 
of  so  many  years  on  the  people  living  under  it;  and  the  interest  it  has  inspired 
among  the  friends  of  free  Government ;  it  is  not  an  unreasonable  inference,  that 
a  careful  and  extended  report  of  the  proceedings  and  discussions  of  that  body, 
which  were  with  closed  doors,  by  a  member  who  was  constant  in  his  attend- 
ance, will  be  particularly  gratifying  to  the  people  of  the  United  States,  and  to 
all  who  take  an  interest  in  the  progress  of  political  science  and  the  cause  of 
true  liberty.  It  is  my  desire  that  the  report  as  made  by  me  should  be  published 
under  her  authority  and  direction  ;  and,  as  the  publication  may  yield  a  con- 
siderable amount  beyond  the  necessary  expenses  thereof,  I  give  the  net  pro- 
ceeds thereof  to  my  wife,  charged  with  the  following  legacies,  to  be  paid  out 
of  that  fund  only,"  &c,  &c. 


INDEX 


LETTERS  CONTAINED  IN  VOL.  IV. 


A. 


To  Charles  Francis  Adams. 

13  August.        1835  - 

-    385 

To  John  Qdinct  Adams. 

24  February,    1829  - 

-      31 

13  March,            "     - 

-      33 

23  September,  1831  - 

-    196 

30  July,            1834  - 

-    345 

To  Anonymous. 

8  November,  1830  - 

-     119 

22  June,            1831  - 

-     187 

1833  - 

-     326 

1834  - 

-    349 

March,          1836  - 

-     428 

To  James  T.  Austin. 

6  February,    1832- 

-     214 

B. 

To  Linn  Banks  and  others. 

18  August,        1834  - 

-    348 

To  James  Barbour. 

6  February,     1829  - 

-      13 

To  George  W.  Bassett. 

30  April,           1833  - 

-     297 

10  August,           "     - 

-     305 

To  Stephen  Bates. 

24  January,      1831  - 

-     150 

To  General  Bernard. 

16  July,            1831  - 

-     190 

To  Andrew  Bigelow. 

1831  - 

-     191 

To  Mann  Butler. 

11  October,       1834  - 

-    364 

c. 

To  Joseph  C.  Cabell. 

5  January,      1829  - 

2  February,       "     - 

13  February,       "    - 

19  March,  "    - 


2 

9 

14 

34 


To  Joseph  C.  Cabell. 
16  August,  "     - 

7  September,  "  - 
31  May,  1830  - 
16  September,  1831  - 

5  October,         "     - 

27  December,  1832  - 

28  December,      "     - 

1  April,  1833  - 
To  Mathew  Carey. 

27  July,  1831  - 

To  Reynolds  Chapman. 

6  January,      1831  - 
To  Henry  Clay. 

30  August,        1816  - 

24  March,  1827  - 
6  January,  1828  - 
9  October,       1830  - 

13  March,  1832  - 

22  March,  "     - 

2  April,  1833  - 
June,  1833  - 

31  January,      1835  - 

To  Rev.  William  Cogswell. 

10  March,  1834  - 

To  Edward  Coles. 

29  August,        1834  - 
15  October,         "     - 

To  Committee  of  Cincinnati. 

20  February,    1836  - 
To  Mrs.  E.  Coolidge. 

8  April,  1830  - 
To  William  Cranch. 

25  July,  1835  - 
To  Elliott  Cresson. 

23  April,  1829  - 
To  Caleb  Cushing. 

9  February,    1836  - 
To  Richard  D.  Cutts. 

4  January,  1829  - 
12  September,  1835  - 


page. 

-  42 

-  45 

-  85 

-  195 

-  197 

-  230 

-  231 

-  294 

-  191 

-  143 

-  556 

-  565 

-  566 

-  117 

-  566 

-  216 

-  567 

-  299 

-  374 

-  341 

-  354 

-  366 

-  427 

-  68 

-  382 

-  35 

-  426 

1 

-  383 


572 


INDEX    TO    LETTERS    IN 


VOL. 


IV. 


D. 


To  Lawrence  T.  Dade  and  others. 


29  June,            1832  - 

- 

-    223 

To  John  A.  G.  Davis. 

1832 [1833] 

-    232 

To  Thomas  R.  Dew. 

23  February,    1833- 

- 

-    274 

To  Philip  Doddridge. 

6  June             1832  - 

- 

-    221 

To  Dr.  Daniel  Drake. 

12  January,       1835  - 

- 

-    372 

To  William  A.  Diter. 

September,  1833  - 

- 

-    308 

5  June,            1835  - 

- 

-    378 

E. 

To  Edward  Everett. 

8  April,           1830  - 

- 

-      G9 

April,             "    - 

- 

-      72 

5  August,           "    - 

- 

-      94 

August,           "     - 

- 

-      95 

20  August,           "    - 

- 

-     10G 

10  September,     "    - 

- 

-     109 

7  October,      1830  - 

- 

-     115 

30  May,             1832  - 

- 

-     220 

22  August,        1833  - 

- 

-     307 

22  October,      1834  - 

- 

-    371 

F. 

To  Charles  J.  Fadlkner. 

26  July,  1832-        -        -    567 

To  Gen.  La  Fayette. 

15  June,  1829-        -        -      39 

1  February,    1830  -      58 

12  December,      "     -  141 

3  August,        1831  -        -        -     192 

To  George  W.  FeatherstonHaogh. 

8  December,   1833-        -        -    325 
To  Philip  R.  Fendall. 

12  June,  1833-  -  -  302 
To  John  Finch. 

20  June,  1829-  -  -  41 
To  Dr.  John  W.  Francis. 

9  July,             1831-  -  -  188 
7  November,     "     -  -  -  200 

To  "  A  Friend  of  the  Union  and 
State  Rights." 

1833-        -        -    334 

G. 


-    304 


II 


To  Gales  &  Seaton. 

5  August,        1833  - 
To  Albert  Gallatin. 

13  July,  1829  - 

To  A.  G.  Gano  and  A.  N.  Riddle. 

25  March,  1835  -        -        -    377 

To  Thomas  W.  Gilmek. 

C  September,  1830  -        -        -    107 


To  Thomas  Gilmer  and  others. 

1835-        -        -    388 
To  Robert  H.  Goldsborough. 

21  December,   1835  -        -        ••    38(. 
To  Thomas  S.  Grimke. 

10  January,       1833-        -        -     266 
6  January,      1834  -        -        -    337 
To  R.  R.  Gukley. 

28  December,  1831  -        -        -    212 

1833-        -        -    273 

19  February,       "...    274 


To  Alexander  Hamilton. 

9  July,  1831  -        -        -     188 

To  AVilliam  Henry  Harrison. 

5  June,  1830  -      88 

1  February,    1831  -        -        -    159 

To  C.  E.  Hayxes. 


25  February,    1831  - 

-    164 

27  August,        1832  - 

-    224 

To  James  Hillhocse. 

May,             1830  - 

-      77 

To  Thomas  S.  Hlnde. 

17  August,        1829  - 

-      44 

To  David  Hoffman. 

13  June,            1832  - 

-    223 

To  Baron  de  Humboldt. 

12  March,          1833  - 

-    292 

To  M.  L.  HURLBERT. 

May,             1830  - 
I. 
To  Charles  J.  Ingersol 

-      73 

8  January,       1830  - 

-      57 

2  February,    1831  - 

-    160 

25  June,              "     - 

-     183 

12  February,    1835  - 

-    375 

30  December,      "     - 

-    387 

14  May,             1836  - 

-    434 

To  C.  J.  Ingersoll,  Clement  C. 
Diddle,  Richard  Peters. 

13  October,      1830  -        -        -    118 

J. 

To  Andrew  Jackson. 

11  October,      1835  -        -        -    384 
To  Peter  A.  Jay. 

14  August,        1833-        -        -    307 
To  Thomas  Jefferson. 

13  December,  1780  -  -        -    564 
To  Joseph  Jones. 

25  November,  17S0  -  -        -    561 

5  December,   1780  -  563 
To  George  Joy. 

9  September,  1834  -  -        -    359 


INDEX    TO    LETTERS    IN    VOL.    IV. 


573 


K. 

To  John  P.  Kennedy. 

7  July,  1834  - 

To  Samuel  Kercheval. 

7  September.  1829  - 

L. 
To  Charles  Carter  Lee. 

May,  1831  - 

To  Major  Henry  Lee. 

14  August,        1833  - 

26  November,     "    - 

3  March,  1834  - 

To  Robert  Lee. 

22  February,    1830  - 
To  Benjamin  Watkins  Leigh. 

1  May.  1836  - 
To  Jonathan  Leonard. 

28  April,  1829  - 

To  Sajhtel  S.  Lewis. 

16  February.    1829- 
To  Frederick  List. 

3  February,    1829- 

To  Edward  Livingston. 

8  May,  1830  - 

2  August,        1834  - 
To  James  B.  Longacre. 

27  August,        1833  - 
To  Isaac  S.  Lyon. 
20  September,  1834  - 

M. 
To  George  McDupfie. 

30  March,  1830- 

8  May,  "    - 

To  William  Madison. 

25  March,  1829  - 

To  James  Maury. 

10  December,  1830  - 
To  James  Monroe. 

18  May.  1830  - 

21  April,  1831  - 

N. 


PAGE. 


344 
17 

180 

306 
324 
340 

66 

432 

38 

30 

13 

80 
346 

307 

364 

67 
81 

36 

146 

82 
■     178 


To  John  M.  Patton. 

24  March,  1834  - 

To  James  K.  Paulding. 

April,  1831- 

April,  "     - 

6  June,  "    - 

27  June,  «... 
January,       1832- 

To  Frederick  Peyster. 

1833  - 
To  Peyton,  Grymes,  and  others. 

1835  - 

To  James  Preston,  Governor  of 
Virginia. 

1  March.  1817  - 
From  James  P.  Preston. 

28  February,    1817  - 

R. 

To  Tench  Ringgold. 

12  July,  1831  - 

To  Thomas  Ritchie. 

24  May,  1830  - 

To  William  C.  Rives. 

10  January,      1829  - 

23  January, 

12  March, 

2  August, 
21  October, 
15  February, 

26  January, 
19  April, 

TO  ASHUR  ROBBINS. 

21  March,  1832  - 

To  James  Robertson. 

27  March,         1831  - 
To  John  Robertson. 

23  May,  1836  - 

To  Benjamin  Romaine. 

14  April,  1829  - 

8  November,  1832- 

To  Richard  Rush. 

17  January,      1829  - 

1831- 


To  Hyde  de  Neuytlle. 

15  June,  1829-        -        -      39 

26  July,  1830-        -        -      93 

To  the  New  England  Society  in 

New  York. 

20  December,  1834  -        -       -    372 
To  Hezekiah  Niles. 

8  January,      1822-        -        -    558 

P. 

To  Francis  Page. 

7  November,  1833- 
To  Benjamin  F.  Papoon. 
18  March.  1833  - 


1833- 


1834- 
1836- 


-  342 

-  172 

-  173 

-  182 

-  182 

-  214 

■  325 

389 


557 


-  556 


-  189 

-  83 

3 
6 

-  289 

-  303 

-  309 

-  339 

-  426 

-  432 

-  216 

-  166 

-  435 

-  37 

-  226 

5 

-  142 


323 

297 


S. 
To  Theodore  Sedgwick,  Jr. 

12  February,    1831  - 
To  Elisha  Smith. 

11  September,  1831  - 
To  Mrs.  Margaret  M.  Smith. 

September,  1830  - 
To  Jared  Sparks. 

8  April,  1830  - 

5  October,         "    - 
8  April,  1831  - 

1  June,  "    - 

25  November,     "     - 


-  161 

-  194 

-  Ill 

-  68 

-  114 

-  168 

-  181 

-  20i 


574 


INDEX    TO    LETTERS    IN    VOL.    IV. 


To  Andrew  Stevenson. 

27  November,  1830  - 

-     120 

27  November,     "     - 

-     121,  1:54 

4  February,    1833  - 

-    2G9 

10  February,       "     - 

-    272 

To  Governor  Stokes. 

15  July,            1831  - 

-     190 

T. 

To  Hcbbard  Taylor. 

15  Augttst,        1835  - 

-     382 

To  J.  K.  Tefft. 

3  December,  1830  - 

-     139 

To  Buckner  Thruston. 

1  March.          1833  - 

-    279 

To  1 TOWNSEND. 

18  October,      1831  - 

-    198 

To  Nicholas  P.  Trist. 

1  March,          1829  - 

-      16 

February,    1830- 

-      58 

15  February,       "     - 

-      61 

3  June,              "     - 

-      87 

23  September,    "    - 

-    110 

5  May,             1831  - 

-    179 

December,      "    - 

-    204 

21  December,      "     - 

-    212 

May,             1832  - 

-    217 

29  May,               "     - 

-    218 

4  December,      "     - 

-    227 

23  December,      "    - 

-    228 

18  January,      1833  - 

-    267 

25  August,        1834  - 

-    354 

To  John  Trumbull. 

1  March,          1835  - 

-    376 

To  George  Tucker. 

20  July,            1829  - 

-      42 

30  April,           1830  - 

-      70 

17  October,      1831  - 

-    198 

6  July,            1833  - 

-    303 

27  June,            1836  - 

-    435 

To  John  Tyler. 

1833- 

-    280 

PAGE. 


V. 


568 


89 
116 
376 


To  Aaron  Vail. 

3  February,     1834  - 
To  Martin  Van  Buren. 

3  June,  1830- 

5  July,  "... 

9  October,         "... 

18  February,    1835  - 
To  The  General  Assembly  of  Vir- 
ginia. 

1  March,  1817  -        -        -    557 

W. 

To  Robert  Walsh. 

25  January,      1831  -        -  -  151 

•'     -        -  -  159 

31  January,         "     -  159 

15  February,      "    -  -  163 

22  August,           "...  194 

To  Benjamin  Waterhouse. 

12  March,          1829  -  32 
May,             1831  -        -  -  180 

21  June,  1833-        -        -    302 

1  March,  1834  -        -        -    340 

To  Daniel  Webster. 

27  May,  1830  -      84 

15  March,  1833-        -        -     293 

To  Roger  C.  Weightman. 

20  June,  1826-        -        -    564 

To  Edward  D.  White. 

14  February,    1832  -        -        -    215 
To  C.  Feximore  Williston. 

19  March,  1836  -        -        -    431 

13  May,  «     .        -        -    433 
To  William  H.  Winder. 

15  September,  1834  -        -        -    363 
To  William  Wirt. 

1  October,      1830  -        -        -  113 

12  October,         "...  117 
To  Joseph  Wood. 

27  February,    1836  -        -       -  427 


GENERAL  INDEX. 


GENERAL  INDEX 


A  C  C  —  ADA 


Accomac  C.  II.  Va..  II.  441. 

Accountant  of  the  War  Department. 
Question,  "whether  warrants  for 
paymenl  ought  to  bo  drawn  by  the 
Secretary  of  War,  immediately  on  set- 
tlements made  by  the  accountant  of 
the  Department  of  War,  or  not  with- 
out a  previous  inspection  and  revi>ion 
of  such  settlements  by  the  accounting 
officers  of  the  Treasury."  HI  409, 
410.  411  Question, "  whether  the  ac- 
countant can  withold  his  counter-sig- 
nature to  warrants  for  moneys  on 
account."  411. 

Account*.  Necessity  of  a  just  and 
final  settlement  of  claims  and  ac- 
counts, I.  241. 

Achaean  Confederacy,  I.  294,  295,  296, 
347. 

Adams.  Charles  Francis.  Letter  to  : 
13  August  1835,  IV.  385. 

Adams,  John,  Letters  to  : 

17  December.  1814,    II.  595 

12  October,     1816,  HI.  28 

22Mav,  1817,    "  41 

7  August,       1818,    "  105 

His  proposed  alterations  in  the 
original  draft  of  the  Declaration 
of  Independence,  HI.  336.  Sen- 
sation produced  in  Virginia  by 
"  the  comprehensiveness  of  his  views, 
the  force  of  his  arguments,  and  the 
boldness  of  his  patriotism  on  the  ques- 
tion of  Independence,"  204.  His 
letter,  in  1770.  to  Wythe,  I.  538.  His 
cabal,  during  the  war.  against  Wash- 
ington, 423.  Intelligence  from  him 
at°  Amsterdam,  38,  39.  Minister  of 
the  United  States  to  Great  Britain, 
[1785],  143.  IV.  498,  499.  His  de- 
fence of  the  American  Constitutions. 
[1787],  I.  332,  423,  536.  Elected 
Vice-President  of  U.  S.  [1789],  462. 
His  "  Discourses  on  Davila,"  [1790] 
37 


537.  His  alleged  connexion  with 
"  Publicola,  "  method,  and  style, 
539.  Likely  to  be  brought  in  to  view 
for  the  Presidency,  in  the  event  of 
Washington's  declining  a  re-election, 
[1792]  558.  Grounds  of  objection 
to  him.  558.  His  political  opinions, 
536,  538,  539.  A  contemplated 
candidate  for  the  Presidency.  [1796], 

II.  83,  L03.  His  enmity  to  the  Banks, 
and  to  the  Funding  system.  106.  Elect- 
ed President  of  the  U.  S.  [1797].  His 
reported  question,  whether  the  offices 
held  during  pleasure  are,  or  are  not, 
vacated  by  the  political  demise  of 
his  predecessor,  117.  His  political 
tenets,  temperament,  Sec.,  112.  119, 
126,  131,  IV.  176.  Contrasted  with 
Washington.  II.  136.  His  di>like  to 
the  city  of  Washington,  136.  Dr. 
Franklin's  character  of  him,  148. 
His  instructions.  &c,  on  French  rela- 
tions. 137,  138,  140.  His  eulogy  on 
the  British  Constitution,  114.  His 
"sortie,1'  on  Monroe,  146,  148 
His  Speech,  8  December  1798.  and  an- 
swers of  the  Senate,  and  H.  R.  149. 
His  letter  to  Tench  Coxe,  167.  His 
favorable  judgment  on  the  course  of 
Madison's  administration,  III.  28,  42. 
His  Observations  on  two  volumes 
bearing  the  name  of  Condorcet,  I.  41. 
His  death,  4  July  1826,  HI.  527.  Judge 
Cranch's  Memoir  of  him.  IV.  279.  His 
intellectual  powers  and  attainments, 
and  ardent  love  of  country,  175. 
A  colossal  champion  of  independence, 
175.  [See  I.  38,  39.  63  78,  210, 
284.  343,  421,  437.  111.  457,  458,  469, 
471.  558.  572.    II.  107.  108,  109.  110, 

III,  114.  115,  118,  120,  133,  141.  144, 
167,  171.     III.  299.     IV.  32.  562.] 

Adams.  John.  Mayor  of  Richmond,  anc 
others,  Letter  to  : 
17  October.     1824,  III.  471 

577 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[ADA  —  AT.  E 


Adams.  John  Qfixcy,  Letters  to  : 
16  October,       1810,    II.  483 

15  November,  1811,     "  517 

23  December,   1817,  III.  52 
l.s  May,             1819,    '•                  131 

7  June,  "       "  133 

27  June.  "        "  139 

13  June,  1820,    "  176 

24  October.       1822,    "  288 
9  December,    1827,  "  G02 

24  February,     182!),  IV.  31 

13  March,  "        "  33 

23  September.  1831,   "  196 

30  July,  1834,    "  345 

Supposed  to  have  draughted  "  Pub- 
licola,"  I.  .r>:;,J.  His  letters  to  Bacon 
in  1808,  IV.  33.  Minister  to  Russia. 
[1801)],  II.  445,  449,  483,  484,  516. 
Extract  of  a  letter  from  him  to  his 
father,  597.  Secretary  of  State, 
[1817].  His  defence  of  Gen.  Jack- 
son's proceedings  in  Florida.  III.  117. 
Collection  of  Documents  published 
by  him  [1822].  "The  Duplicate 
Letters,  the  Fisheries  and  the  Missis- 
sippi," 288.  President  of  the 
U.  S.  His  Third  Annual  Message,  De- 
cember 8,  1827,  G02.  His  corres- 
pondence with  "Several  citizens  of 
Massachusetts,"  IV.  31.  His  Eu- 
logy on  the  Life  and  character  of 
Monroe,  [1831]  196.  His  "  mas- 
terly pen,''  340.  His  intended 
speech  [1834]  on  the  Removal  of  the 
Deposites,  345.  His  Oration  on 
the  Life  and  character  of  La  Fayette, 
[1835]  376.  [See  HI.  40,  47,  53, 
573.  620.    IV.  201,  359.  378,  379,  431.] 

Adams,  Samuel,  I.  375.  385,  423.  IV. 
130.  Governor  of  Massachusetts.  II. 
76. 

Addison, His  attack  on  — —  II.  146. 

Addison,  Joseph,  IV.  1,  2. 

Adet.  V.  A.,  Minister  from  France,  II. 
74,  107.  114. 

Am.i  m.  John.  Letter  to  : 
12  April,  1823,  III.  263. 

Admiralty  Jurisdiction.  [See  "  Neu- 
trals."'] It  should  be  in  the  National 
Government,  J.  289.  Prevalent  opin- 
ion that  Admiralty  Courts  in  England 
are  political  organs  of  the  Govern- 
ment, 11.  388,  389.  The  Lords  of  Ap- 
peal,389.  [See  I.  42.  H.  213, 214,  387.] 

"Advocate,  The:1  HI.  614. 

uftronautics.     I.  115. 

Akfrican  Slave  Trade.  G.  B.  alone 
among  the  European  powers  seems  to 


have  its  abolition  really  at  heart.  III. 
344.  Her  experiment  of  denomina- 
ting it  piracy,  344.  Negotiations  be- 
tween V.  S.  and  G.  B.  concerning  it, 
47:;.    [See  111.  J 49,  150,  152.  190,  344, 

473,  "CONGRESS."] 

Age.  Reference  to  its  weakening  eff- 
eet  on  (he  judgment,  in  accounting 
for  changes  of  opinion,  IV.  207. 

Agrarian  Laics,  IV.  22. 
Agriculture.       [See     "  Chymistry," 
••  Virginia."]     Capacity  of  the  earth 
under  a  civilized  cultivation.  IV.  28. 
Alliance  of  Agriculture  with  civiliza- 
tion. HI.  64.     Its  progress,  67,  74.  75. 
Address  to  the  Agricultural    Society 
of    Albemarle     Va..     63  —  95.    106, 
125,  127.  128.  197.  206,  586.   Circular 
to  the  Agricultural  Societies  of  Va., 
285  —  287,301,586.     Neglect    in   U. 
S.  of  the   study  and  practice   of  its 
true  principles.  III.  76,  77.    Excessive 
cropping.   77.      Bad    ploughing.   78. 
Neglect  of  manures,  79.     Agriculture 
in  China,  80,  85.  90.   Agricultural  Al- 
manac    and     memorial,      119,    473. 
Agricultural      Memoirs.     519.     520. 
527.    Scheme  of  a  "  pattern  farm." 
119,     286.         Agricultural      Depart- 
ment,   in     Madison   College.     Vnion 
town,    Penn.    585.      [See"  III.     108, 
109,  148,  149,  167.  170.  171.  177.  L93, 
194.  205,  206,  207,  208.  209.  225.  257. 
263,  294,  21)6,  302.  303.  30-1.  310—315, 
499,  500,  545,  014.     IV.  475.  476.] 
Agricoltoral  Societies  of  Virginia. 
Circular    Letter    to  : 
21  October,       1822.  HI.  -     -    -  284 
Albany  project.  I.  389.    Projected  Uni- 
on at  Albany  in  1754.  HI.  105. 
Albemarle,  IV.  294. 
Albericus  Gentii.is.    II.  234. 
Alden,   Rev.  Timothy.  Letter   to  : 

IN  February.  1N24.  111.  -  -  -  368 
Alexander  toe  Great.  111.  239. 
Alexander  I.  Emperor  of  Bussia,  II. 
560,  563.  Mystery  respecting  his 
character  and  views.  HI.  '.)7.  98. 
••Already  he  talks  of  '  coercion,^ 
though  he  disclaims  the  sword."  98. 
Later  developments,  235,  238.  His 
retreat  from  absurd  maritime  preten- 
sions. 446,  447. 

Alexander,  Mark,  his  speech  in  II.  R.. 

and  object  in  show  that  the  power  to 

regulate  commerce  does  not  embrace 

the  Tariff  power.  IV.  1  4. 

Alexandria,  a  pott  of  entry,  I.  87.    Its 


A  L  0  —  A  X  O  ] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


579 


exceptional  liberality  and  light  on 
the  3ubjecl  of  a  Navagation  act,  206, 
216.  The  Fiscal  party  there,  579. 
[See  I.  7  1.  1  V.i.  L56,  238,354,448,  I  3, 
515,  576,  605.  II. 43.  16,  17:;.   111.12!.] 

"  Algernon  Sidney."  ByJudgeS.  Roane, 
III.'  222.     IV.  18,  17!  296. 

Algiers.  Letter  from  the  Dey,  and 
answer  to  it,  lil.  9,  10,  15,  34.  A 
principle  of  the  policy  of  the  U.  S. 
that  ■•  as  peace  is  better  than  war.  so 
war  is  better  than  tribute,"  17. 
[See  II.  78,  80.  81,  82,  85,  111.  (ill. 
IV.  488,  502.  503,  504.] 

Alien  BUI,  II.  150. 

Alien  and  Sedition  laws.  [See  "  Con- 
gress."] Discussions  at  Rich- 
mond. II.  11'.).  [.See  II.  151,  154. 
i:>.-..  III.  21'.).  f>0<;.  521).  661.  IV.  (il. 
7:;.  99,  2dt.  210.  2(19.  335,  407,  412, 
414.] 

Aliens.  Law  of  Virginia,  authorizing 
the  Executive  to  confine,  or  send 
away  suspicious  aliens.  I.  215.  [Act 
of  3  December.  178.3.  XII.  Hening's 
Stat.  La.  184,  185,- Rev.  Code,  16,  17. 
1792.  Edit.  1794,  1803,  and  1814,  c. 
62,  §2.    Rev. Code  of  1819,  1.142,143.] 

Allen,  Rev.  Moses,  I.  20. 

Almanara,  Marquis,  Conversation  with, 
J  I.  515. 

Alston, II.  160,  162. 

Ambassadors.  Reason  for  negativing 
a  bill  in  the  Virginia  Legislature,  de- 
fining their  privileges,  I.  269. 

Amelia  Island,  Expedition  against,  III. 
51.54. 

Amelot's  Travels  in  China.     I.  14C. 

America.  See  ["  Spanish  America  " 
•'  United  States  "]  "  Celtic  Antiqui- 
ties of  America."     III.  441, 

'•  American  Academy  of  language,  <fc 
Belles  Lettres,"'  III.  202,  260. ' 

Americas  Colonization  Society,  III. 
134,  135.  137,  138,  240.  Itsprogress, 
IV.  60,  213,  276,  277,  302.  Public 
Lands  a  suitable  fund  for  removing 
emigrants,  213,  214.  276.  Consti- 
tutional obstacle  removable,  214.  De- 
sirable that  pecuniary  funds  to  the 
Society  should  be  obtained  at  homo 
without  a  resort,  to  foreign  countries, 
27:;.  271.  Madison  elected  Presi- 
dent of  A.  C.  S.,  274. 

"  American  Farmer/'1  III.  581. 

••  American  Gazette  and  Literary  Journ- 
al." 111.  441. 
American  Loyalists,  III.  469. 


"American  Quarterly  "Review"  Pro- 
spectus of  it.  III.  537,  538. 

American  Revolution.  [See  "  Histo- 
ry."] Its  historical  magnitude  and 
importance.  I.  514.  111.  231,  232, 
527.  Some  honorable  points  of  it.  I. 
243.  The  commercial  jealousy  of  (;. 
15.  the  real  source  of  it,  II.  562.     [See 

II.  11).  107.] 

Amks,  Fisher,  I.  9.     II.  29. 

Amit  river,  II.  179. 

Amiens,  negotiations  at,  II.  580.  Peace 
of,  IV.  201. 

Amphictyonic  Confederacy,  I.  294,  295, 
296,  347. 

Anderson,  Adam,  His  "  History  of 
Commerce,"  III.  653.    IV.  458. 

Anderson,  Richard  C.  Minister  to  the 
Congress  at  Panama.  His  death,  III. 
540. 

Andre,  Major  John,  Hung  as  a  spy, 
October  2,  1780,  I.  36. 

Andrews,  Parson,  I.  387. 

Andrews,  II.  43. 

Anduaga.  III.  267. 

Aitg'ican  party,  I.  596.  Anglicism, 
II   4,  13,  100. 

Aug! leans,  1.  540,  601. 

Anglified  complexion  charged  on  the 
Executive  politics,  I.  584. 

Anglomavy.  I.  580.  605.     II.  47. 

Animalcules,  III.  68. 

Animals,  III.  70 — 72,  74 — 76. 

Animal  Magnetism,  I.  145, 

'•  Annals  of  Beneficence,"  III.  490. 

Annapolis,  [See  ••Convention  at  An- 
napolis,"] Ignominious  secession  at. 
I.  110.  Dissolution  of  the  Committee 
of  the  States  at,  174,  175.  Idea  of 
Commissioners  to,  for  deliberating  on 
the  state  of  Commerce,  203,  206. 
Why  selected  as  the  place  of  a  Com- 
mercial Convention,   225,  226.      [See 

III.  102.] 

Anniversary    Celebrations.      A  sugges- 
tion for  orators,  IV.  307. 
Annual  Register,  II.  297. 
[Anonymous]  Letters  with  no  address  : 
23  August,    1795,    [Semb.   to    Tench 
Coxe,  or  A.  J.  Dallas]    II.  46 

31  January.        1810,    "  471 

10  December,     1811,    "  522 

25  July,  1812,    "  536 

8  November,    1830,  IV.  119 

22  June,  1831,    "  187 

1833,  i(  326 

1834,  "  :;i!' 

March,  1836,    "  428 


580 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


[  A  X  0  —  A  B  M 


Anonymous  letter  signed  '■  A  Man,"  II. 
mi.'    [See  I.  571.    II.  4.] 

Antiquities.    I.  221. 

Apalachichola.    III.  25,  408. 

••  Apocryphal  New  Testament."  III. 
21G,  234. 

"Appeal"  from  the  new  to  the  old 
Whigs.    IV.  385. 

Appointments  to  Office.  [See  "Of- 
fice.''] 

Apportionment  of  Representation,  I. 
544 — 546,  549.  Successful  persever- 
ance of  the  Northern  members,  I.  550. 
The  Bill  passed  not  Constitutional, 
550.  Negatived  by  the  President, 
552,  554. 

Apple  trees.  Mode  of  planting  them,  I. 
363. 

Apprentices  Library.  III.  216,  258,  259. 

Appropriation  of  money.  [See  "  Com- 
mon Defence  "  and  General  wel- 
fare "  ;  "Constitution  of  U.  S.  "] 
III.  508.  IV.  86,  88,  89,  116,  117, 134 
— 138.  Distinction  between  the  Tax- 
ing and  the  Appropriating  power,  IV. 
238. 

Aranda,  Count,  Minister  of  Spain,  III. 
464,  466. 

Aristocracy.  I.  605.  II.  13,  19.   TV.  467. 

Aristocratic  faction.  II.  4,  100. 

Arkwright,  Sir  Richard.  His  cotton 
machine,  ILL  616. 

Armstrong,  Gen.  John,  Letters  to: 


14  January,      1813,  III. 

387 

8  September,     " 

387 

18  September,     "       " 

389 

24  September,     "       " 

390 

8  October,         "       " 

391 

11  October,         " 

391 

30  October,         "       " 

392 

15  November,      "      " 

393 

14  May,              1814,  " 

395 

17  May,                 "       " 

397 

20  May.                 "      " 

398 

24  May,                "      " 

401 

3  June,                "      '• 

402 

15  June,              '•     •■ 

401 

18. fun.',                 "      " 

406 

20  June,               "      " 

407 

21  June. 

KIT 

27  June, 

408 

6  .Inly,                "      •• 

•111 

18  July,                •'      '• 

412 

30  July,               ••      ' 

414 

4  August, 

415 

li)  August,           ■•     •' 

415 

12  August,            "      " 

416 

13  August,        1814,  in.  417 

i:.  August.  ••      ••  419 

]i;  August,  "       •'  420 

17  August,  "       "  420.  421 

19  August,  "       "  421 

20  August,  ••        "  421.  422 
From  Jons  Armstrong. 

21  May.  1814,    "  400 

22  May,  "        "  400 

18  July,  "  "  412 
Author  of  the  Newburgh  Letters, 
[1783]  111.324.  Appointed  to  succeed 
R.  R.  Livingston  as  Commissioner  to 
France.  [1804]  II.  205.  Opposition, 
and  the  occasion  of  it,  in  the  Senate 
to  his  appointment  as  Commissioner, 
&c  .  for  settling  differences  with  Spain. 
[1806]  219.  His  private  letter  to 
the  Secretary  of  Stale.  21  September, 
1808,  communicated  to  Congress, 
426.  His  friendly  message  to  Jeffer- 
son.  444.  His  picture  of  the  French 
robbery,  [1810,]  180.  His  denun- 
ciations of  Warden,  gross  inconsisten- 
cies, and  enmity  to  Madison  and  Jeff- 
erson, 492,  493.  His  statement  con- 
cerning military  events  in  D.  C.  592. 
His  "  corrosive  attack  "  on  Judge 
Johnson.  III.  324.  His  -'perverted 
statement  in  print,"  [J824],  364! 
Review  of  a  statement  attributed  to 
him,  371  —  385.  His  incongruities. 
Ac,  380,  &c.  Explanation  of  his  ap- 
pointment as  Secretary  of  War,  and  of 
his  retention  in  office.  384,  385.  His 
opinion  that  the  vacancy  produced  by 
"Gen.  Hampton's  resignation,  not 
having  been  filled,  during  the  late 
session  of  the  Senate,  cannot  be  sup- 
plied constitutionally  during  the  re- 
cess of  that  body,"  400.  His  un- 
authorized exercise  of  a  discretion;)  ry 
power  given  by  law  to  the  Executive, 
in  consolidating  four  regiments  into 
two,  401,  402.  Other  arrogalions  of 
authority,  418.  Excitement  in  D. 
C.  against  him,  424,  425.  Omiss- 
ions   of    duty   as   Secretary   of    War, 

125,  426.       Resignation    of    office, 

126.  His  insinuation  respecting 
the  provisional  order  to  Gen.  Jackson, 
of  July  18.  1814,  "stamped  with  an 
incredibility.  &c."  588,  589,  590, 
596,  599.  Monroe's  prohibitory  letter. 
October  13,  1814,  to  Gen.  Jackson 
596,  600.  [Seel.  19  1.  213,  223,  437, 
446,  473,  17s.  484.    III.  403,  404,  407, 

108,  415.  122—426.] 


.v  B  M  —  li  A  N  ] 


GEN  i:  R  A  L     INDEX 


581 


Army.     [Sec  "Commutation  of  half 
pat."    ••  Revolutionary  Army."] 
Arnold  Benedict.    His  apostacy,  plot, 

and  previous  iniquitous  jobs.  1.  35. 
Rumour  concerning  him,  36.  b'ired 
at,  42.  His  junction  with  Cornwallis 
in  Virginia,  46.  His  successful  blow 
against  New  London,  50.  Burnt  in 
effigy  at  Charleston,  S.  C.  II.  9. 

Arnold  and  Sewell.  Extract  from 
their  argument  in  the  case  of  the  Im- 
manuel,  II.  359.  360.  Its  coolness, 
clearness  and  reasoning,  361,  362. 

Artillery.  Letter  to  the  Washington 
and  Jefferson  Artillery  at  Rich- 
mond :  1809,  II.  456. 

Asia,  III  90. 

Assise  Courts.  I.  122,  148,  204,  207, 
215,  261, 

Assumption  of  State  debts.  I.  508,  509, 
511—518,  Revived,  519—522,  548, 
550,  552.     IV.  465. 

Athens,  IV.  464. 

Atmosphere j  III.  70 — 73. 

Attwater,  — ,  II.  425. 

Atwatlr,  Caleb,  Letter  to  : 
April,      1823,     III.      -    -    -    -  316 

Auckland,  Lord,  II.  403,  404. 

Aulic  Council,  I.  31^,  313. 

Aurora,  case  of  the,  II.  213. 

"  Aurora  TAe,"  newspaper,  II.  47,  495. 

Austin,  Benjamin,  Jefferson's  letters  to, 
IV.  7,11. 

Austin,  James  T.,  Letter  To  : 

6  February,  1832.     IV.  -    -    -  214 

Austria,  I.  575.    II.  601.    IV.  501. 

Austrian  Netherlands,  I.  509. 

Authorship.  Difference  between  its 
profits  in  England  and  in  U.  S.,  III. 
309. 

Autobiography.  A  privilege  to  which 
few  can  pretend.  III.  449.  Dr.  Frank- 
lin's autobiography,  IV.  175.  [See  IV. 
173,  174,  214,  307.  308.] 

Autograplis,  IV.  305,  306,  337.  Auto- 
tographic  specimen  for  the  Princess 
Victoria,  IV.  568. 

Azcni,  Dominique  A..  II.  234,  265,  277. 
376.    His  work  on  Piracy,  III.  48. 

B. 

Bache, — ,  II.  74, 84, 91.  His  publication 
of  Debates  on  the  British  Treaty,  II. 
94,  105. 

Bacon,  Lord,  I.  ISO. 

Baoot,  Charles,  Minister  from  G.  B.  to 
U.  S.  III.  115. 

Bailey,  Mr.,  II.  137.     III.  512,  513. 


Baker,  G.,  T.  122. 

Barer,  John  M.,  Consul  at  Tarragona, 
III    15. 

Baker, ,  II.  612. 

Balance  of  Trade.    [See  "  Trade.'"] 

Baldwin,  Abraham.  I.  451.  II.  10". 
IV.  247. 

Ballot,  The.  I.  181,  188,  189. 

Baltimore,  For  the  new  Constitution, 
I.  356. 

,  Letter  to  the  Committee 

of  citizens  in  : 

10  April,  1815,    II.  602 

[See  1.  156,  511,  520.  539.     II.  66,  95, 
602.     111.88,409,412,426.] 

Ban  of  the  Empire.    I.  311. 

Bancroft.  — ,  I.  230. 

Bams,  De  — ,  I.  51. 

Bank  of  Columbia.  II.  482.  Bank  of 
North  America.  IV.  126,  127,  170. 

Banks,  Linn,  and  others,  Letter  to  : 
18  August,       1834,     IV.  -    -    -  348 

Bank  of  U.  S.  [See  ll  Hamilton,  Alex- 
ander," '•  Jackson,  Andrew,"  &c., 
4c]  Established  in  1791.  Uncon- 
stitutional, I.  5^8.  Rise  of  shares. 
Jobbers.  Political  gambling.  538, 
Manoeuvres,  539.  Moral  and  political 
evils  of  the  Bank,  511.  Duration  of 
the  charter  as  recommended  by  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and  as 
fixed  by  Congress,  IV.  485.  Estab- 
lished iii  1816,  III.  4,  18.  The  ques- 
tion of  Constitutionality,  5H,  56,  542. 
IV.  485.  Notice  of  the  plea  that  the 
chain  of  precedents  in  favor  of  its 
Constitutionality  had  been  broken  in 
one  instance.  Explanation,  81,  165, 
187,188.  Warmly  opposed  in  1834, 
367.  [See  I.  527,  529,  530,  535,  539, 
591.     IV.  183,  194,  211,  321,  427.] 

Banks.  Their  influence  felt  in  the 
progress  of  Petitions  in  favor  of  the 
British  Treaty  of  1794,  II.  98.  Cir- 
cumstances in  which  a  Bank  director 
soliciting  subscription  to  a  political 
petition,  is  like  a  highwayman  with  a 
pistol,  demanding  the  purse,  98.  The 
multitude  and  mismanagement  of 
Banks,  the  principal  cause  of  the  per- 
plexed situation  of  the  moneyed  and 
mercantile  affairs  of  the  country,  III. 
128,  159.  Evils  of  their  diffusive 
credits,  491.  Their  tempting  liberali- 
ty. IV.  146.  Project  of  a  State  Bank, 
as  an  antidote  to  the  partialities  of  a 
National  Bank,  II.  165.  Suggested 
plan  of  a  Bank,  III.  568.  State  Banks, 
13,  17,  26,  27,  33.      The   power   of  a 


:>si» 


G  E X  ERAL    IND E X 


[  B  A  X 


Plate  to  make  Banks,  IV.  160.  Rem- 
edj  for  tli«>  unforeseen  evil  of  their 
rlepretiated  uotes  crowding  out  a 
sound  medium,  161.  [See  II.  110, 
217.    111.37,195.] 

Bankrupt  laws,  III.  204,  325. 

Baptist  <  !hurches  on  Neal's  Creek  and 
on  Black  Creek,  North  Carolina, 
Letter  to  the  : 

3  June,  1811,  II.  -  -  -  511 
Respect  of  the  Baptists  in  U.  S.  for 
the  distinction  between  Religious  and 
Civil  Government,  EL  511.  Their 
progress  in  Virginia,  III.  124. 

Barba,  Dr.—  ,  III.  237. 
Barber,  Capt.,  I.  135. 
Barbeyrac,  Jean,  II.  237,  240,372. 
Barbour,  — ,  His  death  in  his90th  year, 
III.  494. 
Barbour.  James,  Letters  to  : 

16  June,  1814,    II. 

25  November,  1820.  III.  192 

5  December,    1823,     "  350 
18  December,    1828,     "                  661 

6  February,  1829,  IV.  13 
[Governor  of  Virginia,  1812  — 1814.  | 
Secretary  of  War,  111.  515.  His  lie- 
port,  Feb.  3,  1826,  on  the  preservation 
and  civilization  Of  the  Indians,  deser- 
vedly commended  for  its  moral  and 
intellectual  merits,  522.  Minister  to 
G.  B.  661.  IV.  35.  [See  ID.  344,  419, 
478.] 

Barbour,  Philip  P.,  III.  609. 
Barcelona,  III.  88. 

Baring.  — ,  II.  186,  192.     III.  102.  394. 
Barlow.  Joel,  Letters  to  : 

7  February,     1809,     II.  428 

17  November,  1811,  "  518 
24  February,  1812,  "  52(1 
11  August.             "         "                 540 

Another  person  fixed  on  to  be  Secre- 
tary of  State.  II.  428.  [See  II.  533— 
535   541,  560.] 

Barnes,  — ,  II.  145.  149. 

Barney,  Joshua,  and  others,  Letter  to: 
1  May,  1794,      II.  -    -    -     12 

Barnwell,  — ,11.  20,  26. 

Barry.  Commodore,  EL  564. 

Barry.  William  T.  LETTER  to  : 

4  August.      1822,     III.  276 
Barthelkmy.Abbe  Jean  Jacques,  1.  465. 

BaRTLETT,  JUDGE,  Fleeted  a  senator 
from  X.  II,.  I.  439,  442. 

Barton,  W.,  His  paper  read  in  1791  to 
the  Philosophical  Society  at  Philadel- 
phia, 111.  211. 

Bartram,  — ,  I.  583. 

Bertram's  Trawls,  111.  502. 


Bascom,  I:  iv.  HENRY  B.  Letters  to: 

21  July,  1827,    III.  585 
10  November,    "         "  596 

Bassett.  Richard,  a  Senator  from  Del- 
aware, 1.  439,  1  12. 

Basset.  George  W.  Letters  to  : 
30  April,         1833,     IV.  297 

lit  August,         ••        _"  :;":' 

Batavian  Republic,  II.  176. 

Bati  -   Stephen,  Letter  to  : 

2  1  January.     1831,     IV.  150 

Bathi  rst,  Lord,  II.  295. 

Baton  Rouge.  1.  '.'7. 

"Batture,  the,"  U.  479,  531,  532. 

Bay,  Juice.  II.  180. 

Bayard,  James  A.,  Remarks  on  a  Vin- 
dication by  his  suns,  of  his  memory 
against  certain  passages  in  Jeff* 
writings.  IV.  151  —  158.  His  deposi- 
tion supposed  by  Jefferson  to  have 
been  taken  in  "  a  suit  between  Burr 
and  Cheetbam,"  153.  Extract  from 
his  deposition  in  the  case  of  Gillespie 
vs.  Smith,  153.  154.  His  peculiar  and 
trying  situation  during  the  President- 
ial contest  in  11.  R.  in  1801,  157,  15*. 

BEARD,  Jonas.  His  case.  I.  Tli. 

Beasley,  Rev.  Frederick,  Letters  to: 

22  December,  1824,   HI.  -     -     -  474 
20  November,  1825,    "     -    -    -503 

His  tract  on  the  being  and  attributes 
of  God,  III.  503. 

Beasei.ey,  Reuben  G..  Consul  at  Lon- 
don. II.  5(J8. 

Beaumarchais,  Pierre  A.  C,  His  claim. 
II.  179. 

Beccaria,  Cesar  B.,  Marchese  di,  III. 
612.     ••  Beccarian  illusions,'1  580. 

BeckLEY,  John.  Clerk  of  H.  R.,  I.  461, 
4ti2.  535,  539. 

Beckwith,  •  Substance  of  a  con- 
versation with.  1.  530  —  534,  [See  1. 
540. 

Beiqic  Confederacy,  L  302  —  309. 

Bell -,  U.  l-l 

Benson,  Mr,,  L  453.     IV.  176. 

Bentham,  Jeremy.  His  capacity.  &C 
His  offer  to  reform  the  l  S.  Code  of 
laws.  111.  52,  53.     IV.  431.  433. 

Bentley,  Rev.  William.  Letters 
to  : 

27  December.    1809,     II.  462 

28  December,    1816,  III.  31 
Berlin  Decrei .  Q.  460,  535. 
Bermuda,  III.  15. 

Bermuda  decrees.  Reversed  in  England, 

II.  70. 
Bermuda  Hundred.     A  port  ot   entry 

I.  87. 


B  OT  ] 


GEN  Eli  A  L     I  N  l>  E  X 


58<5 


Berk  ibd,  I  Ik\.  Simon,  Letter  to  : 

lo.luly.         1831,      IV.     190 
See  1 92.  193. 

BERRIEN^  JOHN  M.,  IV.  II  I. 

Bkvan,  J.  V..  IV.  139. 

Bibi  :..  Wattons's  Polyglot,  01.  448. 

Bibliography.  See  "  Books/'  Arc]  I. 
(is.  224,  225,  231,  248 

Biddle,  Nicholas,  Letters  to  : 
23  February,  1823,  III.  302 
17  May,  L827,       "      579 

31  May.  ••  "       583 

His  Eulogy  on  Jefferson,  J II.  579. 
His  erroneous  aotice  of  the  Revised 
Code  of  Virginia  of  1785.  579,  580. 
His  error  as  to  J.'s  age.  580. 

Bigelow,  Andrew,  Letter  to  : 
1831,       IV.    191 
His  election  sermon.  191. 

Bills  of  Rights.    I.  423,  424,  127.  473. 

Bingham,  William,  II.  5,  29,  84,  157. 

BlNNEY,  HORACE,  His  speech,  IV.  371. 

Binns,  John,  and  others,  Letter  to  : 
11  February,    1813,    H.    557 

Biography.  Its  general  importance, 
when  connected  with  public  transac- 
tions, III.  448,  441).  Prevailing  ex- 
amples have  tiio  much  usurped  the 
functions  of  the  historian,  IV.  173. 
A  difficulty  in  u  task  properly  bio- 
graphical,  173. 

Birds,  I.  Ui3.  Number  of  their  varie- 
ties, HI.  68. 

Bikkbeck,  Morris,  Letter  to  : 
1813,  II.     575 

Birmingham.  HI.  015.     IV.  476,  477. 

Births,  III.  194. 

Blackburn,  Cor,.,  I.  118,  124. 

Black  hole  of  Calcutta,  III.  73. 

Black  rock  All.  420. 

Blackstone's  Commentaries.  III.  233. 

Blackstone's  Reports.  II.  213,  214. 

Bladensburg,  Battle  of,  III.  422  —  424. 
IV.  363. 

Blair,  John,  A  delegate  to  the  Feder- 
al Convention,  I.  275.  [See  I.  261, 
271,  273.  328,  387.     II.  75,  80.  82. 

Bland,  Col.,  1.  61,  108,  232,  237,  254, 
262.     III.  196. 

Bland,  Theodorick,  1. 458,  512,  514. 
IV.  560,  561.  564.  His  death,  I.  519, 
520. 

Bland,  — ,  I.  387. 

Blockade.  II.  190,  370,  371,  385,  467, 
484,  487,  489,  512.  IV.  434.  Notice 
of  the  discontinuance  of  the  blockade 
at  the  entrance  of  the  Elbe,  and  Weser. 
Quasi  Protest.  II.  216.  Question  of 
notification,  IH.  44  45. 


Blockhouse,  Destruction  of,  III.  391. 

Bloodwortu,  'I  imothy,  1 1.  35. 

Bloodworth,  Mr.,  II.  117. 

Blocnt,  William,  II.  .v.'.  L26,  1-7. 

Blount,  Willie,  Governor  of  Tennes- 
see, III.  388,  393. 

Boardly,  Me.,  His  ".Sketches  on  rota- 
tions," II.  39, 

Bolivar,  Gkn.  Simon,  His  constitutior 
for  Peru,  III.  oil. 

Bollman,  Erick,  Substance  of  his  com 
munication  to  President  Jefferson,  re- 
specting Burr's  conspiracy,  II.  393  — 
401. 

Bonaparte,  Joseph,  II.  528,  529. 

Bonaparte,    Napoleon,    II.    117,  212, 

110.  Mil.  172.  512.  513,  520.  557.  III. 
98,  555.  558.  IV.  201.  Emperor  of 
the  French.  II.  205.  Spanish  Ameri- 
ca the  great  object  of  his  pride  and 
ambition,  II.  440.  His  late  confisca- 
tions, comprising  robbery,  "theft, 
&c,"  II.  478.  His  want  of  money, 
ignorance  of  commerce.  &c.  491.  The 
'■  Infernal  Machine."  IV.  71.  Hisdis- 
asters  in  Russia,  II.  559.  His  return 
from  Elba,  609.  Possible  change 
in  his  policy,  609.  His  Code.  An  ob- 
jection to  it  in  practice.  111.  Oil. 

Bond, ,  I.  536,  560.     II.  102. 

BONNYCASTLE, .  III.  435. 

Books ,  pamphlets,  &c.  Evil  of  turning 
a  "  controversy  loo  much  into  the 
wilderness  of  books,"  I.  592.  Class- 
ification of  books,  IV.  342.  A 
tax  on  imported  books  an  impolitic 
and  disreputable  measure.  III. 221). 230. 
[See  I.  64,  65,  66.  75.  79.  115.  170. 
211,  224,  225,  293  —  315,  379,  465, 
466.    II.  11,  39,  92,  131,  214,  215.  531. 

111.  116.  126,  177,  178,  185.  201,  205, 
216,  217,  230,  234,  235,  260,  204,  272, 
281,  290,  296,  302,  305,  348,  435,  440, 
441,  448,  452,  481,  482,  483,  190.  501, 
502,  514,  532,  533,  535,  583,  612.  653, 
654.  IV.  1,  2,  40,  42,  115,  167,  168, 
179,  190,  219,  244,  304,  325.  340.  312. 
364,  365.  371.  372,  376,  378.  431,  458.] 

Boston.  I.  155.  539,  601.  II.  2,  5,  13, 
(>.').  66,  93.     III.  646. 

"  Boston  Patriot,"  III.  140,  141. 

Botta.  Carlo,  Letter  to  : 
January,  1817,  III.  322 
His  "Camillo."  Translation  [bv  G. 
A.  Otis]  of  his  nistory  of  the  War  of 
Independence  of  U.S..  III.  32,  178, 
201.  General  merits  and  demerits  of 
the  history,  203.  Probable  origin  of 
his  fictitious  &c,  Speeches,  203,  204. 


.84 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


[  B  O  U  —  BUR 


1772,   . 

[.    5 

1773, 

7 

(i                   i 

'    9 

1764,   " 

" 

'   13 

" 

'   15 

1775, 

17 

328 

4'.)!) 
500 


Booddiot,  Ei.r.vs,  T.  -U>2. 

Bourne,  Sflvanus,  11.  144,    III.  47. 

BOURNONVILLE,  — ,  II.  123. 

Bowdoin,  James,  Governor  of  Massa- 
chusetts, 1.  137.  His  character  respec- 
table, and  talents  moderate,  [1.209. 

Commissioner  to  treat  at  Paris,  211). 

[See  I.  439.     II.  223.] 
Brackenridge,  Mr..  1.  13,  18.  [See  561. 

597.] 
Bracton,  Henry,  II.  39. 
Bradford,  William  Jr.,  Letters  to  : 
9  November, 

28  April, 

6  September, 

29  January, 
1  April, 
1  July, 

20  January, 

Bradley,  Stephen  R„  II.  20 
Brady,  Col.  Hugh,  III.  420. 
Brandt,  — ,  I.  335. 
Brannan,  John,  Lettrsto  : 
19  July,  1823,    III. 

7  December,  1825,     " 
26  September,     "  " 

Hi.s  ••  Official  Letters  of  Military  and 
Naval  ( tfficers,  &c,"  III.  328. 

Braxton,  Carter,  1.  221. 

Braxton,  ,  I.  200.    Heads  a  party 

for  remitting  the  tax  for  1785,  I.  218. 

Brazil,  III.  45. 

Bread  articles,  Exportation  of,  II.  80. 

Breckenridge,  John,  II.  178. 

Breckenridge,  Mr.,  I.  108. 

Brehan.  Marchioness,  I.  429,  471,  472. 

Brent,  Col.,  1.  213. 

Brent.  Daniel.  Chief  Clerk  in  State 
Department.  IV.  556. 

Brent,  Richard,  Elected  to  H.  R.  from 
Va.,  II.  181. 

Brevets,  III.  400.  401,  415,  420,  421. 

Brick,  encrusting',  II.  158. 

Bringhurst,  J.. 'II.  89.  139. 

Brissot,  John  P.,  I.  407.  Guillotined, 
II.  4. 

British  Debts.  Madison's  proposition 
respecting  them  submitted  to  11.  of  I), 
of  Virginia,  I.  83 — 85.  A  protest 
from  the  Senate,  87.  The  action  of 
the  Legislature  unpopular,  90.  Legis- 
lation left  incomplete  from  a  singular 
cause.  I.  132.  [See  I.  121,  131.'  201. 
208,  209,  210.  217.  247,  379.  39!).  1H  I. 
583.     II.  10.] 

British  Government,  IV.  469.  -170.  [See 
••  Great  Britain."] 

'■British  party,"  II.  2.  83.  109.  114.  489. 

British  ships  of  war.     Their  irregulari- 


ties in  the  harbor  of  New  York,  II. 

206. 
•British  Treaty"      [See  "Great  Brit- 

ainy  "Jay,  John."  ••  Treaties."] 
Brooke,  Francis,  Judge  of  the  Court 

of  Appeals,  of  Virginia,  Letter  to: 

22  February,  1*2*/  ill.  622. 
[See  III.  613,  623.] 

Brooke.  Robert,  Elected  Governor  of 

Virginia.  II.  26. 
Brooks*  Rev.  — .  IV.  273. 
Broom,  Alderman.  I.  363. 
Brougham,  Henry,  IU.  445,  C13.    IV. 

566. 

Broweri.s, ,  a  sculptor,  III.  594. 

Brown,  Gen.  Jacob,  II.  591.      III.  167, 

169,  403,  404,  412.  415.  416,  421,  561. 
Brown.  John.  Letter  to  : 

23  August.  1785, 1.  177. 
Communicated  to  Madison  Gardoqui's 
overture,  IV.  365.     A  friend  of   the 
Union,  365. 

Brown,  — ,  Published  Debates  in  Con- 
gress, IV.  305. 

Brown 's  paper,  II.  86. 

Brown,  Mr..  I.  384,  473,  494,  561. 
III.  9. 

Browne.  Arthur,  Professor  of  Civil 
Law  in  the  University  of  Dublin,  II. 
349,  383.     [See  "  Ward,  Robert.'"] 

Browne,  W.  S.,  I.  363. 

Browne,  Mr.,  I.  101.    II.  166. 

Buenos  Ayres,  III.  97. 

Buffalo,  III.  416.  420. 

Bupfon,  George  L.  LeClerc. Count  de, 
1.  75,    146,    234,    236.      His   cuts   of 

Quadrupeds,  I.  237. 

Banker's  Hilt.  Buttle  of.  Why  it  was  not 
the  subject  of  one  of  the  four  histori- 
cal paintings  provided  for  by  Cong- 
ress, IV.  376. 

Banker-hill  Monument  Association.  IH. 
487. 

BCRBECK,  — .  III.  401. 

Blrgoyne,  Gen.  John,  News  in  Eng- 
land of  his  surrender.  I.  31.     IV.  194. 

Burk, ,    His   History  of  Virginia, 

III.  205,  532. 

BURKE,  EDMUND.  His  extravagant  doc- 
trines on  the  question  of  the  right  to 
bind  posterity,  I  534.  [See  1.  363, 
536.] 

Burlamaqot,  John  J..  I.  614,  634. 

Burlington  Bn/.  III.  396.  Burlington 
Heights.  111.  395,  403,  561. 

Bcrnet,  Bishop,  1.  390. 

Burning  in  effigy,  II.  9. 

Burnley, ,  I.  142,  152. 

Burr,  Aaron.  II.  27    160.  162,  163,  492 


1?  D  T  —  C  A  M  ] 


G B XER AL    INDEX 


585 


IV.  151       158,  421.    Bollman's  state- 
ment ol  liis  plans  and  views.  II.  393 
101.      Authentic   facts    concerning 

them,  supposed  to  exisi .  IV.  45. 
Butler,  Major,  II.  68,  69. 
Butler,  .Manx.  Letter  to  : 
11  October,      L834,     IV.    364 

Engaged   in   a   historical  work,    IV. 

365,  366. 
Butler,  Pierce,  a  delegate  from  Smith 

Carolina  to  the  Federal  Convention, 

I.  282.     [See  I.  410.] 
Butler,  Richard,  a  Commissioner  to 

treat  with  the  Indians,  I.  104. 
Bynkerschoeck,   Cornelius   Van,    II. 

243  —  249,  257— 2G2,  309,  370,  371, 

372. 


C .  Gen.,  IV.  3.5. 

Cabell,  William,  I.  387.    [See  I.  357.] 
Cabell,  Cm..  1.  449. 
Cabell,  Judge  William  II.,  IV.  46. 
Cabell  Joseph  C.  Letters  to  : 

26  Julv.  1819,    -III.     141 
13  January,     1827,      "      547 

7  February,      "  "      550 

18,  22  March,  "  "  570 
L8  September,  1828,     "      636 

15  October,  "         "      647 

30  October,  "  "  648 
5  December.  "  "  658 
5  January,  1829,  IV.  2 
2  February,      "  "  9 

13  February,  "  "  14 
l!i  March,  "         "        34 

16  August.  "  "  42 
7  September,    "         "       45 

31  May,  1S30,  "  85 
l(i  September,  1831,     "      195 

5  October.         "  "      197 

27  December.    1832,     "       230 

28  December.  "  "  231 
1  April,           1833,      "      294 

His  view  of  the  Virginia  doctrine  in 
1798-  '99.  IV.  43.  His  Speech  on  the 
Convention  question,  35.  His  MS. 
pamphlet.  45.  46.  Restored  to  the 
public  councils.  195.  [See  III.  126, 
291,  343,  433,  439,  440.  476,  478,  602, 
613.     IV.  16,  297,  322.] 

Cabinet  Appoirdments.  Considerations 
to  be  regarded  in  making  them,  III. 
562.  Refusals  to  accept,  during  the 
War  of  1812.  IV.  562,  563. 

Cabinet  Councils.  Memoranda  concern- 
ing, III.  403.  404.  408. 

Cabot, ,  II.  514. 


Cadiz,  ID.  lis. 

Cadore,  .1.  B.  X.  Champaony,  Die  de, 
His  letter  to  Armstrong,  stating  an  ac- 
tual repeal  of  the  French  decrees,  II 
187,  199,  500. 

Cadwalader,  Lambert,  I.  452. 

Calais,  III.  Kit. 

Calcutta,  III.  7:;. 

Caldwell,  Charles,  Letters  to  : 

22  July,  1825,     III.    493 
28  September,    "         "     501 

23  November,    "         "      504 

His     -Elements  of  Phrenology,"  III. 
501. 

[Calhoun,  John  C]  Reputed  author 
of  the  heresy  of  nullification.  IV.  :i(i7. 
His  Speech.  "  lauded  as  worthy  of  let- 
ters ,,[  gold."  IV.  367. 

Callbnder,  James  T.,  H.  lis.  144.  His 
tine,  172.  173.  In  love,  and  seeks  a 
Post  Office  appointment.  1 7 :>.  Report- 
ed Debates  in  Congress,  IV.  305.  [See 
IV.  413.] 

Callis,  Major.  I.  99. 

Calmar  Union  of,  1.  389,  392,  393. 

Calonne,  Charles  A.  de, , 

Cambkelexu,  Churchill  C.  Letter  to  : 
8  March,     1827,     HI.     506 
His  speech  in  II.  R.  on  the  wool  duty, 
Ac.  III.  566. 

Cambrian,  a  British  ship.  Extraordina- 
ry pretension  of  her  commander,  II. 
206. 

Camden,  Battle  of,  I.  44. 

■■  CamUlo,"  III.  32. 

-  ( 'amiUus."  His  defence  of  Jay's  Trea- 
ty. II.  47,  90. 

Campbell,  Arthur,  His  ambition,  I. 
134.     Heads  a  faction.  219. 

Campbell,  George  W.,  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury,  Letters  to  : 
3  June.  1814,     III.     403 

2  November,    "         IL    591 
<  lonsiderations  leading  to  his  appoint- 
ment.  HI.  563.      [See  ILL   403,  404, 
408,  422,  423.] 

Campbell,  Gen. ,   Sword  voted  to 

him  by  Virginia,  II.  207. 

Campbell,  Cor..  —.III.  320. 

Campbell,  ['.'Alexander.]  11.81,  84,87. 

Campbell.  ,  [of  Richmond.]  H. 

81,  84,  87. 

Canada  [See  "  Beckwith."  •'  Trade,"] 
II.  530,  563,  574,  583.  610.  HI.  113. 
171,  180,  181,  388,  389,  390,  394,  407. 
557.  558,  653.  IV.  447,  498.  Sugges- 
tions in  Parliament  of  alienating  the 
province.  III.  347.  "Colonial  pastur- 
age    for     hungry     favorites,"     348. 


58t5 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


[CAN  —  C  E  R 


Plan  for  invasion  of  Canada,  560, 
561. 

Canals.  [See  "  Constitution-  of  U.  S." 
"  Roads  and  Canals."]  1  heir  impor- 
tance, III.  262.  Project  of  a  canal 
between  the  waters  of  Virginia  and 
N.  Carolina,  I.  207,  220.  Negotiations 
between  several  States  for  a  canal 
from  the  head  of  the  Chesapeake  to 
the  Delaware,  243.  Treatise  on  small 
canals,  II.  106.  Delaware  and  Chesa- 
peake Canal,  III.  262.  IV.  92,  149. 
Question  as  to  Canals  decided  by  the 
will  of  the  nation.  III.  483.  Erie  Canal. 
uniting  the  great  Western  Lakes  with 
the  Atlantic  Ocean.  Medal  commem- 
orating its  completion,  524.  New 
York  Canals.  574.  Considerations  on 
the  abuse  of  a  power  in  Congress  to 
make  Canals.  IV.  149,  150.  The  want 
of  canals,  railroads  and  turnpikes 
would  be  a  reproach  to  the  Republi- 
can system  of  U.  S.  if  excluding  them, 
150.     [See  IV.  136,  147  —  149.] 

"  A  candid  state  of  parties."  IV.  481, 
482. 

Canning,  George,  His  coaxing  Speech 
at  Liverpool,  III.  353,  354.  Ascribes 
to  D.  M.  Erskine  the  stating  of  certain 
conversations,  II.  450.  W.  Pinkney's 
account  of  a  conversation  with  him, 
III.  453.454.  His '•general  slipperi- 
ness,"  454.  [See  II.  425,  431,  450, 
452,  460.  470.  III.  339  —  341,  344, 
352,  354.] 

Canova,  Antonio,  IV.  71. 

Cape  May,  III.  467.      Cape  St.  George, 

III.  468.  Cape  St.  John.  Cape  Buona- 
vista,  and  Cape  Eayc,  III.  463,  464, 
468,  469. 

Capital  punishment,  I.  191.  HI.  342, 
343. 

Capitol  at  Richmond,  I.  224. 
Caraccas,  II.  488. 

Cardell,  William  S.,  Letters  to  : 
March,         1820,     III.     172 
19  January,      1821,     "        202 
Carey,  Judge,  His  death,  I.  498. 
Caret,  Mathew,  Letters  to  : 
10  March,         1824,     III.     427 
12  May,  1825,      "       489 

1828,      "       636 
27  July,  1831.     IV.     191 

His  newspaper  II.  140.  His  "  Annals 
of  Beneficence."  III.  490.  His  Ad- 
dress to  the  citizens   of  S.  Carolina, 

IV.  191.     His  "  Museum,"  304. 
Carmichael,    William,     I.    39.       IV. 

563. 


Caroline,  Queen  op  England,  Her 
case,  III.  180. 

Carpenter, ,  Reported  Debates  in 

Congress.  IV.  305. 

Carr,  Dabney,  1.  233. 

Carr,  Peter,  His  studies,  1.  220. 

Carr,  Mr.,  II.  73,  94. 

Carr,  Mrs..  I.  99,  150.  220.  225. 

Carrington.  Edward,  I.  108.  335,  343, 

•  408,  430,  450.  IV.  65.  A  delegate 
from  Va..  to  Congress,  I.  221,  262. 

Carrington,  P.,  I.  357. 

Carrington. ,  I.  536. 

Carriages.  [See  "  Tax."]  Carnage 
Tax.  TV.  230,  400. 

Carroll,  Charles,  His  longevity,  III 
629. 

Carroll.  Daniel,  IV.  247.  [See  I.  364, 
385.] 

Carroll,  Mr.,  His  claim  for  a  house 
occupied  as  a  military  deposite.  De- 
fect of  proof.  &c,  III.  22. 

Carter,  Col.  Charles,  I.  232,  380.  II. 
26. 

Carter.  Mr.,  I.  149,  152. 

Carthage,  I.  39  1. 

Cartwright.  Major  John.  Letter  to  : 
1824,      III.  -  355 
His  volume  on  the  English  Constitu- 
tion, 355.     [See  IV.  1911.  207.] 

Casa  Calvo.  — ,  Marquis  de.  Spanish 
Governor  of .  H.  1S2,  203. 

Caspapini's  Letters.  I.  15. 

Cass.  Lewis.  Governor  of  Michigan  T., 

111.  394,  413.  414,  417.  Distressing 
case  presented  by  him.  8. 

Castries,  C.  E.  G.  I>e  la  Croix.  Marquis 
de.  Minister  of  the  French  Marine, 
1.41. 

Caswell,  Richard,  Governor  of  N 
Carolina,  I.   367. 

Castleruagh.  Lord.  II.  532,  541.     Ill 

112,  445,  554. 

Catharine  II.,  Her  present  to  Bufion, 
I.  79,  80.  Her  plan  for  a  comparative 
view  of  the  Aborigines  of  America, 
and  desire  for  American  vocabularies, 
281. 

Cathcart.  James  L.,  U.  S.  Consul  at 
Cadiz.  III.  47. 

Cattle,  Short  horned,  III.  520. 

Census.  Bill  for  taking  a  census  pass- 
ed by  II.  R.  and  thrown  out  by  the 
Senate.  I.  507.    [See  I.  527.    III.  213.] 

Cer.hcui.  Joseph,  a  sculptor.  Paper 
recommending  his  plan  of  a  monu- 
ment   to    the  American   Revolution.* 

■  See   "Historical   Magazine"  for  August, 
185'J,  p.  204-230-. 


■    la] 


GENERAL    INDEX 


587 


His  gonitis,  irritability,  &c.  Guillotin- 
ed. IV.  71. 

for  discharging  interesl  of 
home  debt,  I.  L53,  257.  Loan  office 
certificates  and  bills  of  credit,  IV. 
466, 

.,(  of  territory  beyond  the  Kenha- 
way,  and  on  this  side  of  the  Ohio,  I. 
72,  73, 
Chalmers,  George,  His  '-Collection  of 

treaties  between  G.  1?.  and  other  pow- 
ers." II.  266,  268,  272,  274.  276,  27s. 

••  ClumceUor's  foot"  as  a  standard.  &c., 
111.  643. 

Chancery,  a  separate  Court  of  C,  advi- 
sable, i.  180. 

Chaplains  /•<  ( '■ingress,  III.  274.  Change 
in  a.  II.  594. 

Chapman,  Reynolds,  Letters  to  : 
25  January,     1821,    III.    204 
6  January,     1831,    IV.     143 

Cluxritable  Institutions.  Their  liable- 
ness  io  laid  mismanagements,  III.  183. 

Chakle.ma.gxe,  III.  235). 

Charleston,  S.  C,  I.  9.    II.  GO,  163,  454. 

III.  Hi. i. 

•  Charlotte,"  <  lase  of  the,  II.  310. 
Charlottesville,  III.  306.  474,  493,  594. 

IV.  141. 

Charlton,  — ,  Letter  to  : 
lit  June,  181"),  LL  606. 

Charters.  Charters  of  liberty  granted 
by  power,  and  charters  of  power 
granted  by  liberty,  IV.  467,468.  Char 
ters  of  Government  as  compacts,  ins 
Probable  change  in  public  opinion  as 
to  the  inviolability  of  charters,  and 
of  donations  for  pious  and  charitable 
uses.  111.  477.  Suggestion  of  a  stand- 
ing law  limiting  all  incorporating  Acts 
to  a  certain  period,  480. 

Chase,  Samuel,  1. 147.  111.546.  Against 
the  w\v  Constitution,  I.  356,  378.  Ap- 
pointed an  associate  Justice  of  U.  S. 
S.  C  II.  80,  82,  8i.  His  impeachment, 
2U). 

Chastellux,  Francis  J.,  His  work"  De 
la  Felicite  publique,"  I.  68.  His  trav- 
els in  U.  S.,  HI.  499. 

Chastbllux,  Mad.  de,  II.  81. 

CJiatahotuihee,  Fort  on  the.  III.  21. 

Chaijncey,  Capt.  Isaac,  III.  10,  34,  3.3, 
387.  390,  393,  403,  420,  561. 

Chauxcey,  Mtt..  III.  401. 

Chazotte,  P.  S.,  Letter  to  : 
30  January,  1821,  III.  205. 

Cheat.  Is  it  a  degeneracy  of  wheat? 
Experiment,  III.  109. 


Cheat  river,  1.  12.").  126. 

Check,  Alexander,  11.  320. 

••  Checks  'ii,<l  balances."  Political  Ex- 
periment m  U.  S.,  III.  42. 

Cheetham,  James.  A  libel  suit  against 
him,  attributed  to  Burr,  IV.  153. 

i  'In  rokee  dialect,  I.  281. 

Cherokees.     [See  "  Indians,"]  IV.  113. 

Chersant,  M.,   IV.  93. 

Chesapeake.  The,  Case  of.  II,  407,  408, 
466,  107,  470,  516,  517,  520, 

Chesapeake  Bay,  II.  564.    HI.  388,  419. 

Ghevruel,  I.  234. 

Chew.  Joseph.  I.  64. 

Chew,  Mi:.,  III.  20. 

Chickasaw  Indians.  III.  11,  12. 

Guilds,  Francis,  IV.  172,  203,  309.  [See 

I.  534.  540.] 
Chili,  III.  75. 

China,  III.  ti,  80,  85,  90,  209.  Infanti- 
cide. IV.  454. 

Chinchbug.  Its  destruction  of  grain.  I. 
92.     HI.  331. 

Choctaw  dialect,  I.  281. 

Christian,  Gen.,  I.  134. 

Christian,  Col.,  killed  in  a  skirmish 
with  the  Indians,  I.  233,  238,  239. 
[See  I.  107.] 

Christie,  Gabriel,  II.  36,  38. 

( 'hronology.  III.  205. 

Chymistry,  III.  69.  70,  285,  290 

Cicero,  III.  204.    IV.  384. 

Cincinnati,  Letter  to  Committee  ofC.  : 
20  February.  1836,  IV.  427. 

Cincinnatds,  Size  of  his  farm,  III. 
515. 

Circles,  German,  I.  311. 

( 'I i  rn.it  Courts,  I.  175. 

•■  Citizen."  Query,  as  to  the  Constitu- 
tional meaning  of  the  term,  III.  187. 

•■  Claims-law,"  respecting  horses  and 
houses  destroyed  by  the  enemy,  in  the 
war  of  1812,111.  35. 

Claiborne,  William  C.  C,  Letters  to: 
21)  February,     1804,     II.     199 
28  Au-'nst.  "         "      203 

30  August,  "        "      204 

Governor  of  the  Territory  of  Orleans, 

II.  204,  210.     [See  II.  191.  218.] 
Clark.  Daniel,  His  li  Proofs  of  the  cor- 
ruption of  Gen.  James  Wilkinson,  ami 
of  his  connexion  with  Aaron  Burr," 
II.  492.     [See  II.  394.] 

Clarke.  A..  I.  264. 
Clarke,  Gen.,  II.  ■'>')'>. 
Clarke,  Governor,  III.  21,  407. 
Clarke,—,  1.452.     II.  15,  19. 
Clarke,  Dr.  Samuel,  III.  503. 


588 


GENERAL     INDEX. 


[  C  L  A 


IV. 

556 

III. 

430 

IV. 

565 

" 

566 

" 

117 

<( 

566 

(( 

216 

u 

567 

" 

299 

it 

374 

Clay.  Henry,  Letters  to  : 

30  August,    1816, 
April,        1824, 

24  March,      1827, 

6  January,   L828, 

'.)  October,  1830, 
13  .March,  1832, 
22  March, 

2  April,  1833, 
June,         1833, 

31  January,  1835, 
Declines  the  office  of  Secretary  of 
War,  HI.  20,  23,  25.  His  Speech  in 
II.  R.,  March  30.  31,  1824,  on  Ameri- 
can Industry.  430.  His  Address  at 
Cincinnati  .August  3,  1830,  and  rescue 
of  the  Resolutions  of  Kentucky  in 
-"96  -  '99  from  the  misconstructions  of 
them,  IV.  117.  His  Speech  in  U,  S. 
Senate,  February  2,  3,  (J,  1832.  in  de- 
fence of  the  American  System,  566. 
His  Speech  in  U.  S.  Senate.  February 
25,  1832,  on  the  bill  modifying  the 
Tariff,  567.  His  Report  in  January 
14,  1835,  on  Relations  with  France. 
374.     [See  III.  620.    IV.  301.] 

Ci.ay, ,  I.  577. 

Claypole, .  III.  610. 

Clayton,  Augustine  S.,  His  "  Review 
of  the  Report  of  the  Committee  of 
Ways  and  Means."  IV.  164. 

Clayton,  John  M.,  IV.  72. 

Clinch,  Col.  Duncan  L.,  III.  24. 

Clinton,  De  Witt,  His  suddeu  death, 
HI.  620. 

Clinton,  George,  I.  417.  442,  457, 
462.  II.  3.3.  209.  The  "  Anti-  federal 
colors"  of  his  character  in  1788,  I. 
572.  V.  P.  U.  S..  His  casting  vote  in 
the  Senate  against  a  bill  establishing 
a  Dank  of  U.  S.,  IV.  165,  186.  187. 

Coalter,  John,  Judge  of  the  Court  of 
Appeals  of  Va.,  IV.  46. 

Coasting  Trade  [See  "Tradk."]  II.  343. 

Cobbett,  William,  His  Attack  on  E. 
Randolph's  "  Vindication/'  II.  72,  73. 

Cocokius,  II.  237. 

Cochrane,  Admiral,  Sir  Alexander, 
His  proclamation,  "addressed  to  the 
blacks,"  indicating  "the  most  invet- 
erate spirit  against  the  Southern 
States,"  III.  399.* 

Cockburn,  Admiral  George.  Burns  the 
"National  Intelligencer."  &c, III. 241. 
Cocke,  Gen.  John  II..  His  Resolutions, 
&c,  the  Agricultural  Society  of  Albe- 
marle, Va.,  III.  287,  290. 

*  Soe  the  Proclamation   dated  at   Bermuda, 
April  2,  1814,  in  Niki't  Weekly  Xegisler,  VI. 


"CodedeVHumaniii,!.  293.  294, 

Codification  and  Codes.  Doubts  respect- 
ing codification.  II.  'i73,  274,  510, 
(ill.     IV.  431,  433. 

Coercion.    [See  '•  ALEXANDEB  1."] 

Coercion  op  the  States.  Jefferson's 
opinion  with  respect  to  the  powers  of 
the  did  Congress  to  coerce  delinquent 
Siiiies  ;  and  that  it  was  not  necessary 
to  find  a  right  to  coerce  in  the  federal 
articles,  that  being  inherent  in  the  no- 
tion of  a  compact.  IV.  229.  In  estab- 
lishing a  new  Constitution,  the  right 
of  coercion  should  be  expressly  de- 
clared, I.  290.  Necessity  of  operating 
by  force  on  the  collective  will  of  a 
State  in  lie  precluded,  290.  Want  of 
coercion  in  the  Government  of  the  (  <m- 
federacy  a  vice  of  the  >\  stem,  322,  323. 
Objections  to  a  compulsive  observance 
of  the  Federal  law  by  the  States.  344. 
Consequent  establishment  of  '-a  Gov- 
einmentwhieh,  instead  of  operating  on 
the  States,  should  operate  on  the  indi- 
viduals composing  them."  344.  This 
Government  "was  to  operate  within 
the  extent  of  its  powers  directly,  and 
ce-ercively,  on  individuals,  and  to  re- 
ceive the  higher  sanction  of  the  Peo- 
ple of  the  States  "  III.  521. 

Coffee  Trees,  I.  583. 

Coffin's  case.  II.  389. 

Cogswell,  Rev.  William.  Letter  to  : 
10  March,   1834.  IV.  341. 

Coin.  Disorders  of  the.  I.  152. 

Colden,  Cadwalader  D.,  His  Memoir 
on  the  New  York  Canals,  HI.  574. 

Cole,  J.,  I.  576. 

Coleman,  Henry,  Letter  to  : 
25  August,  1825,  III.  494. 

Coles.  Col.  Isaac,  I.  454,  458. 

Coles,  Capt.,  II.  459. 

Coles.  Edward,  Letters  to  : 
23  May,        1823,    III.    319 
29  August,    1834,     IV.     354 
15  October,      "  "      366 

Coles,  Mr..  II.  434,  446,  450.  575.  III. 
34. 

Colombia,  III.  447. 

Colonial  Policy,  The  principle  of.  HI. 
578,  .">79.  Utile  of  reciprocity.  Dis- 
cussions in  Congress  in  1794,  579. 
[See  HI.  627,  628,  649,  650.] 

Colonial  Trade.     [See  ••  Trade."] 

Colonization  of  free  •persons  of  color. 
[See  ••  American  Colonization  Socie- 
ty."] ill.  t;:;4. 

24'.'.     See    HildrcMs   Hist.,  U.  S.  2nd  S*T.  I1L 

463.   484. 


COL  —  CO  Ml 


GENERAL    INDEX 


589 


Columbia  II.  157. 

I  i;  Institute,  II r.  631. 

i'iiu  mi. i  la,  III.  86,  303. 

Ciii.vin,  John  I'..,  Bis  "  Historical  Let- 
ters." III.  205. 

Commegts,  Cornelius,  Letter  to  : 
21  March,  I  son.  II.  434. 

Commerce,  [See  "Trade,"]  TIL  566, 
567,  .">77.  The  term  used  in  books 
and  in  conversation  as  synonymous 
with  ••  Trade,"  JV.  233.  Interior  com- 
merce  of  a  country  more  important 
than  its  exterior,  266. 

■■  Commercial  Advertiser,"  HI.  226. 

Commercial  discontents  in  cities,  I.  156. 

Commercial  propositions,  [1785.]  I.  205. 

*■  Commercial  Resolutions,"  proposed 
bv  Madison,  in  II.  R.  3  January,  1794, 
II.  2,  4,  (i,  7.  12.  IV,  364.  Evils  im- 
puted to  them,  486.  Retrospect:  Dis- 
position of  <i.  B.,  at  the  time  of  the 
Peace  of  17.-0.  to  liberal  arrange- 
ments respecting  American  com- 
merce. 486,  493.  Pitt's  bill,  486,  493. 
Speedy  change  of  policy,  486,   487. 

Abortive  projects  Of  retaliation  and 
redress,  187.  Movement  of  the  Legis- 
lature of  Virginia,  resulting  in  the 
Federal  Convention,  -1*7.  At  the  first 
Congress  under  the  new  Constitu- 
tion, the  principle  of  discriminating 
between  nations  in  Treaty  and  those 
not  in  Treaty  asserted  by  II.  It-,  but 
not  adopted  by  the  Senate.  487.  Sub- 
sequent inaction  of  Congress  on  the 
subject,  487,  188.  The  witholding  of 
the  Western  posts,  488.  Depredations 
on  the  high  seas  on  American  com- 
merce, licensed  by  G.  B.,  488,  493. 
Algerine  piracies,  488.  Estimated  an- 
nual damages  from  G.  B.,  488.  Ap- 
peal of  President  Washington,  4>s. 
Introduction  of  the  Commercial  Reso- 
lutions as  a  radical  remedy.  488. 
Grounds  of  opposition  to  them.  488, 
489.  The  Commercial  Resolutions 
discriminated  between  nations  in  trea- 
ty and  nations  not  in  treaty,  by  an 
additional  duty  on  the  manufactures 
and  trade  of  nations  not  in  treaty  ; 
and  they  reciprocated  the  Navigation 
laws  of  all  nations  who  excluded  the 
vessels  of  U.  S.,  from  a  common  right 
of  being  used  in  the  trade  between 
U.  S.  and  such  nations.  489.  Self- 
evident  right  of  U.  S.  as  an  independ- 
ent nation,  to  regulate  their  trade  ac- 
cording to  their  own  will  and  interest. 
4S9.     The  commercial  regulations  of 


G.  B.  have  discriminated  among  for- 
eign nations  whenever  it  was  thought 

convenient,  190.  Navigation  articles 
proposed,  common  to  the  other  coun- 
tries along  with  <i.  1!..  ami  reciprocal 

between  <i.  P.  and  I'.  >..  and  fell 
short  of  an  immediate  and  exact  reci- 
procity of  the  navigation  laws  of  G.  B., 

490.  The  Resolutions  furnish  no  pre- 
text for  war  :  improbability  that  they 
would  lead  to  war.  190.  Previous 
American    commercial     policy,    490. 

Most  of  the  Slates  exercised,  while 
they  had.    the  power  over  trade,    on 

the  principle,  if  nol  in  the  mode,  of 
the  Resolutions,  490.     Improbability 

that  (J.  15.  would  be  aided  by  tin-  com- 
bined Powers  in  an  unjust  war  against 
U.S., 490,491.  The  conduct,  public  and 
private,  of  those  members  of  Cong- 
ress who  advocated  the  Resolutions, 
proves  that    they  do  not  desire  war, 

491,  192,  493.  Contrary  course  of 
their  opponents,  493,  494,  495.  G.  B. 
a  commercial  nation  :  —  more  vulner- 
able in  her  commerce,  than  in  her 
fleets  and  armies.  192.  American 
commerce  the  most  valuable  branch 
which  she  enjoys.  192.  Her  pride, 
&C.,  and  probable  calculations,  492. 
At  the  close  of  tin'  war  in  1783,  G.  H. 
ready  to  secure  her  commerce  with 
U.  S.,  even  at  the  expense  of  her  W.I. 
monopoly,  49.'5.  Examination  of  the 
charge  that  the  propositions  tend  to 
degrade  U.  S.  into  French  Colonies, 
196,  197.  Alleged  secret  and  hostile 
ambition  of  France,  496.  The  French 
Revolution,  496.  Benefit-  of  French 
commerce  to  II.  S.,  496,  497.  Use 
made,  by  the  opponents  of  the  propo- 
sitions, of  Jay's  Mission  to  England, 
497 — .502.  Influence  of  commercial 
restrictions  by  U.  S.  on  the  policy 
of  G  B.,  500.  In  the  event  of  a 
failure  of  the  mission,  the  respective 
courses  required  by  consistency,  from 
the  opponents  and  from  the  friends  of" 
the  Resolutions,  502. 

"  Committee  poweis  of  Congress,"  IV. 
375. 

••Common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare,"  III.  508.  531,  i;.">7."  IV.  PL  7:;. 
Suggestion  of  an  amendment  to  Const. 
P.  S.  expunging  the  phrase  or  making 
it  harmless  by  a  limitation,  III.  ■">•!'>. 
Invalid  appeal  by  a  Congression- 
al Committee  to  the  Revolutionary 
Congress  and  to  Washington,  as  sane- 


590 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


[COM  —  COM 


tioning  the  power  claimed  under  thai 
phrase,  531.  Its  origin  and  true  punc- 
tuation, IV.  120.  lis  history  and  im- 
port. Citations  from  the  printed 
Journals  of  the  Convention.  Resolu- 
tions, Report,  &c,  121  —  124.  Wil- 
son's pamphlet,  127.  Sense  in  which 
the  terms  were  used  by  i lie  t'ramers 
of  the  Constitution,  and  understood 
by  the  ratifying  Conventions.  Decla- 
rations of  rights.  Amendments  by  a 
majority  of  the  States.  128,  12H.  Sense 
in  which  the  terms  were  understood 
by  the  First  Congress,  at  it-  first  sess- 
ion, when  the  subject  of  amendments 
was  taken  up,  130.  R.  II.  Lee's  orig- 
inal construction  of  the  terms,  and 
necessarily  inferred  change  of  opin- 
ion, 130,  131.  Argument  drawn  from 
the  punctuation  in  some  editions  of 
the  Constitution.  Semicolons,  and 
commas.  &c.,  1152,  133.  Two  modes 
of  presenting  the  text,  and  inference 
from  one  of  them,  that  it  conveys  a 
distinct  substantive  power  to  provide 
for  the  common  defense  and  general 
welfare,  131,  132.  The  evidence  con- 
clusive against  this  inference.  I  32. 
Facts  establishing  the  authenticity  of 
the  punctuation  which  preserves  the 
unity  of  the  clause,  132,  133.  Insig- 
nificance of  the  question  of  punctua- 
tion, against  the  proofs  of  the  mean- 
ing of  the  parties  to  the  I  '(institution. 
133.  [See  Vol.  IV.  p.  lviii.]  Distinc- 
tion introduced  between  a  power 
merely  to  appropriate  money  to  the 
'•  common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare." and  a  power  to  give  full  effect 
to  objects  embraced  by  the  terms,  L34. 
Magnitude  of  the  power  of  appropri- 
ation to  all  objects  of  "  common  de- 
fence and  general  welfare."  A  grant 
of  power  to  impose  unlimited  taxes  for 
unlimited  purposes,  incredible,  134. 
x\  power  of  appropriation  without  a 
power  of  application,  unmeaning.  134. 
The  consent,  of  all  the  States  would 
be  extra-constitutional.  The  doctrine 
that  the  consent  of  an  individual 
State  could  authorize  the  application 
to  its  individual  purposes  of  money 
belonging  to  all  the  Slates,  still  mere 
untenable,  1  :>•">.  A  resort  to  the  con- 
sent of  the  State  Legislatures  preclu- 
ded by  the  Constitution,  136.  Peculi- 
arities in  the  structure  of  the  govern- 
ment intended  as  safeguards  due  to 
minorities,  135.     Case  of  money  ap- 


propriated to  a  canal  to  be  cut  within 
a  particular  State.  136,  137.  If  the 
clause,  ■•  to  pro\  ide  for  the  common 
defence  and  general  welfare,"  be  not 

a  mere  introduction  to  the  (•numera- 
ted powers,  and  restricted  by  tliem.it 
is  a  distinct,  substantive  power,  &C., 
involving  all  the  powers  incident  to 
its  execution,  and  coming  within  the 
purview  of  the  clause  concluding 
the  list,  which  empowers  in  Congress 
••  to  make  all  laws  which  shall  be  ne- 
cessary and  proper  tor  carrying  into 
execution  the  foregoing  powers,"  137. 
Result  of  the  investigation.  137,  138. 
171,  172.  Threefold  duty  of  C  S.  to 
preserve  their  system  of  government  in 
its  purity,  symmetry,  and  authenticity; 
and  to  pay  sacred  regard  to  the  boun- 
daries of  power  between  the  federal 
and  the  State  Governments,  and  to 
the  boundaries  between  the  several 
Departments  into  which  the  aggregate 
power  is  divided.  138.  The  terms 
qualified  by  the  detail  of  power-  i  on- 
nected  with  them,  171,  172.  [See  IV. 
210.  232,  322.] 

Commutation  of  Half  pay.  Question  as 
to  its  origin.  III.  57. 

Compact.  The  old  idea  of  a  Compact 
between  the  Government  and  the 
People  is  justly  exploded,  IV.  63. 
The  common  notion,  previously  to  the 
American  Revolution,  had  been  that 
the  Governmental  compact  was  be- 
tween the  Governors  and  the  govern- 
ed :  the  former  stipulating  protection, 
the  latter  allegiance.  296.  This  view 
so  familiar  that  it  slipped  into  Hayne's 
speech  on  Foot's  Resolution.  296. 
The  idea  of  a  compact  among  those 
who  are  parties  to  a  government 
is  a  fundamental  principle  of  free 
Government.  Its  effect,  63,  64. 
Compact,  express  or  implied,  is  the 
vital  principle  of  free  Governments 
as  contradistinguished  from  Govern- 
ments not  free :  and  a  revolt  against 
this  principle  leaves  no  choice  but  be- 
tween anarchy  and  despotism,  294, 
336,  391,  422. "  It  is  inseparable  from 
the  nature  of  a  compact,  that  there  is 
as  much  right  on  one  side  to  expound 
it.  and  to  insist  on  its  fulfilment  ac- 
cording to  that  exposition,  as  there  is 
on  the  others  so  to  expound  it  as  to 
furnish  a  release  from  it  :  and  that  an 
attempt  to  annul  it  by  one  of  die  par- 
ties may  present  to  the  other  an  op- 


COM  —  CON] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


501 


linn  of  acquiescing  in  (he  annulment, 
or  <>l'  preventing  it,  as  the  one  or  the 
other  course  may  be  deemed  the  less 
evil,  64.225,228,268.  This  principle  is 
applicable  even  to  tin-  case  "I'  a  mere 
league  between  nations  absolutely  in- 
dependenl  of  each  other,  65.  Mis- 
take ni'  Judge  Roane  in  making  the 
(,'oi-t  rnments  parties  to  the  ( !on- 
stitutional  compact  of  0.  S.,  2%. 
Supposed  by  sonic,  at  the  period  of 
the  Revolution,  that  it.  dissolved  the 
social  compact  within  the  Colonies, 
ami  produced  a.  state  of  nature  which 
required  a  naturalization  of  those 
who  had  m»t  participated  in  the  Rev- 
olution, 392.  Suppositions  implied 
in  the  theory  which  contemplates  a 
certain  number  of  individuals  as  meet- 
ing, and  agreeing  to  form  one  political 
society,  in  order  that  the  rights  &c, 
nf  each  may  be  under  the  safeguard 
of  the  whole.  392,  393,  394.  In  the 
case  of  the  Government,  of  Y.  S.  the 
compact  was  duly  formed,  and  by  the 
highest  sovereign  authority,  422.  What 
this  authority  might  have  done,  and 
what  il  did,  122,423,  2!):;.  The  un- 
deniable effect  resulting  from  the 
compact,  423.  The  faith  pledged  in 
the  compact  being  tin'  vital  principle 
of  all  tree  Government,  that  is  the 
true  test  by  which  political  right  and 
wrong  are  to  lie  decided,  and  the  re- 
sort   to    physical   force   justified,  -12.'!. 

Whatever  lie  the  mode  in  which  the  es- 
sential authority  established  the  Con- 
stitution, the  structure  of  the  Consti- 
tution, its  power,  rules  of  exposition, 
means  of  execution,  and  tendency  to 
Consolidation  or  Disunion,  must  be 
the  same,  423. 

CumuiiHc-  powers  of  Congress,  IV.  375. 

Compass,  Pocket,  I.  146. 

Compensation  to  members  of  Congress, 
I.  480.  490.     III.  35. 

Compromise,  [See  '•Constitution  of 
U.S."  "Missouri  Question."]  The 
provision  in  the  Constitution  of  U.  S., 
which  established  an  equality  of  votes 
in  the  Senate,  and  an  inequality  in  the 
H.  R..  was  a  Compromise,  which  term- 
inated the  "  threatening  contest  *'  in 
the  Federal  Convention.  III.  634.  A 
spirit  of  compromise  necessary,  IV. 
54.  42!).     [See  IV.  451.] 

"  Committor."  HI.  211. 

Condorcet,  M.  J.  A.  N.  C,  Marquis  ok. 
I.  422,  4U5.     His  fallacious  idea  of  a 


Government   in    "  one    centre,' 
41. 

Confederacies,  Notes  of  bccrexT  and 
Modern,    I.   293  -     315.       Examples 

showing  the  defects  of  mere  Confed- 
eracies. 389. 

Conederact  of  177s.  Notes  on  the, 
\  ices  of  the  system,  I.  319  328. 
Dr.  Franklin's  sketch  of  the  Articles 
of  Confederation.  70.  Willi  respect 
to   Foreign  nations,  the  Confederacy 

of  the  Stales  was  held  defacto  t'>  be  a. 
nation,  or  other  nation-  would  not 
have  held  national    relations   with   it. 

IV.  422.  A  Federal  Government  cre- 
ated by  the    State   Governments,  75. 

The  '•  Articles  of  Confederal  ion  "  not 
in  force  till  they  were  finally  ratified 
by  Maryland  in  1781,  I2(i.  [See  IV. 
418.] 
Congress  or  the  Coxkehekacy  : 
[See  "Manufactures,"  "Tartff,  " 
"  Trade,"  Ac]  Convert  200  millions 
in  circulation  into  a  real  debt  of  5 
millions.  1.  34.  'their  projects  for  a 
valuation  of  the  land,  (>2.  (i:j.  The 
neglect  or  inability  of  the  States  to 
furnish  their  assessed  quotas,  caused 
the  ordinance  incorporating  the  Dank 
of  North  America,  as  a  necessary  in- 
strument tor  carrying  on  the  War  of 
the  Revolution.  IV.  12(i.  127.  Resolu- 
tions of  Congress  Is  April  17s::.  re- 
commending, as  necessary  lor  restor- 
ing the  Public  credit,  and  for  paying 
the  principal  and  interest  of  the  Pub- 
lic Debt,  that  Congress  should  be  in- 
vested with  the  power  to  lay  certain 
specific  duties  ;  that  the  Stales  them- 
selves should  levy  a  revenue  to  furn- 
ish their  respective  (juntas  of  a  year- 
ly aggregate  of  1.1  millions  of  dol- 
lars lor  paving  the  interest  of  the  Pub- 
lic debt  ;  and  that  they  should  make 
liberal  cessions  to  the  Union  of  their 
territorial  claims,  I  is.  Pamphlet  of 
Congress  concerning  Revenue,  &c,  I. 
65.  Committee  of  the  States  dis- 
persed. No  quorum,  and  possible  in- 
terregnum, loo.  A  rule  of  Congress 
which  threatened  to  exclude  merit 
from  a  choice  in  which  merit  only 
ought  to  prevail,  117.  Their  several 
.Ministerial  Departments,  111.  The 
sth  Article  of  Confederation.  ]  i:i.  196. 
Proposed  change  in  the  'Jth  Article. 
Kit).  Expunction  by  Congress  of  a 
clause  for  supporting  a  religious  es- 
tablishment, 154.     A  consideration  to 


592 


GENERAL    INI)  E  X 


[CO  X  —  CO  X 


be  weigher!  in  recommendations  to  the 
States,  169.  Answer  to  objections 
against  entrusting  Congress  with  a 
power  over  Trade,  171.  17.'!.  Import- 
ance of  amending  defects  in  (lie  Fed- 
eral system.  171.  Disordered  affairs 
of  the'  Confederacy.  L95.  ,;  Congress 
have  kept  (lie  vessel  from  sinking, 
but  it  has  been  by  standing  con 
stantly  at  the  pump,  not  by  stopping 
Hie  leaks  which  have  endangered  her," 
195,  196.  Desiderata  urged  by  expe- 
rience and  present  situation.  195.  He- 
sired  power  in  Congress  to  enforce 
payment  of  State  quotas,  and  over 
Trade,  l!)(i.  Proposition  to  ask  from 
the  Slates  a  general  and  permanent 
authority  for  Congress,  with  the  con- 
sent of  11  States,  to  regulate  Trade. 
197.Dispositions  of  different  sections  to- 
ward it,  1!)7.  Notes  of  Madison's  speech 
on  it  in  1785,  201.  202.  Sacrifices  of 
Sovereignty  on  which  it  rests.  Diffi 
culties,  205.  Action  of  N.  Jersey,  an 
example  of  impotency  in  the  Federal 
system,  229,  230.  Formidable  oppo- 
sition to  amending  it,  241.  Objects 
depending  in  Congress,  I.  27f>.  Rec- 
ommendation of  the  proposed  Con- 
vention at  Philadelphia,  27(5,  278,  279. 
Impotence  of  the  existing  system,  279, 
280.  Thinness  of  Congress,  282,  290. 
"  Mortal  diseases  of  the  existing  Con- 
stitution,''285,  2S7.  Proposed  reme- 
dies. 285,  286,  287  —  290.  Subjects 
before  Congress.  290.  291,  318,  335. 
338,  341,  342,  343.  Differences  as  to 
place  for  their  re-assembling.  291,  292. 
Motion  to  remove  shortly  to  Philadel- 
phia, 315.  No  quorum  in  Congress.  I. 
3(i2,  3G7.  The  ordinance  of  "the  old 
Congress,  giving  to  the  N.  AV.  Territo- 
ry its  distinctive  character  on  the  sub- 
ject of  slavebolding,  without  authori- 
ty, III.  154.  [See  1(15.]  Secret  Journ- 
als of  the  Old  Congress,  188,  346. 
All  powers  of  Government  confound- 
ed in  the  Old  Congress,  200.  202,  531. 
No  evidence  that  the  Old  Congress 
ever  assumed  such  a  construction  of 
the  terms  "  common  defence  and  gen- 
eral welfare  "  as  is  claimed  for  the 
new.  531.  Report  of  a  Committee  of 
the  Revolutionary  Congress  in  1780 
on  the  claim  of  F.  S.  to  the  navigation 
of  the  Mississippi  through  Spanish 
Territory.  3Ki.  Proposed  publication 
of  the  Archives  of  the  Old  Congress, 
3G2. 


Coxoress  oi? tiie  Uvri'-n  States.  [See 

"  CoXSTITOTrON  oK  IT.  S."     "  PRIVILEGE 

of  Congress,"  ••  Reitkesentativk."] 
Elections  to  Congress,  I.  138,  439,  440, 
441,442,4  15.  152.  Proportion  of  Anti- 
Federal  members  in  the  first  II.  of  R., 
-112.  Want  ofaquomm,  152.  151.  158. 
Quorum  formed.  461.  Political  com- 
plexion, 459,  462.  Rules  id'  II.  R. 
462.  Senate.  463.  Subjects  of  con- 
sideration. 163,  466,  467,  472,  -171, 
475.  489.  Moderation  and  liberality, 
of  Congress,  -173.  Erroneous  reports 
of  discussions,  177.  Decision  that  the 
power  of  removal  from  office  is  in 
the  President  alone.  478.  Tardy  pro- 
gress id'  business,  -iso.  485.  Hill  for 
takings  census,  507.  Other  proceed- 
ings. 508,  511.  530.  Jobbing,  &c,  of 
members,  ~>'-'>^.  Proceedings  at  the 
2d  session  of  the  First  Congress,  5!  i. 
et  seq.  Law  providing  for  Invalid 
pensioners,  decided  to  he  unconstitu- 
tional. 55  1.  Course  proper  to  be  pur- 
sued as  to  the  re-assembling  of  Cong- 
ress, in  consequence  of  the  existence 
of  a  malignant  fever  at  Philadelphia, 
605.  Proceedings.  II.  2.  et.  seq.  Ques- 
tion of  referring  the  ways  and  means, 
9,  10.  Practice  in  II.  R.  of  copying 
items  from  British  Revenue  Law-.  1  i. 
Proceedings,  14.  et  seq.  30.  Elections, 
1!).  35.  Precipitate  and  arbitrary  pro- 
ceedings of  II.  R.,  in  the  case  of  the 
Detroit  Traders.  71.  Undue  weight 
allowed  to  forms.  7s.  Proceedings  on 
Treaties.  i)7.  !)',).  101.  Answer  to 
President's  speech,  109.  Prorogation 
of  Congress.  120.  Affair  of  Lyon  and 
Griswold,  127,  128.  Impropriety  in 
general,  of  abstract  votes.  Exception- 
al cases,  135.  Naval  bill,  138.  Law 
for  capturing  French  Privateers.  117. 
Bill  suspending  commerce  with  the 
French  dominions.  117.  Hill  relating 
to  elections  of  F.  and  V.  P..  157. 
Committee  to  inquire  into  the  effects 
of  the  late  fires.  171.  Practical  rela- 
tions between  the  Executive  and  Con- 
gress, 200,  201.  Prevalent  mistake 
of  Foreign  Agents  on  this  subject,  ib. 
Disposition  towardsEngland  A'  France, 
427.  "Unhinged  state  "id'  the  pro- 
ceedings of  Congress,  172.  Library, 
III.  20.  Rill  of  II.  P.  of  an  extraor- 
dinary character,  respecting  Poads 
and  Canals.  35.  Manufactures.  ,".7.  38. 
•■  Congress  seems  at  length  to  have 
adopted  the  true  principle,  that  as  we 


[CON  —  CON 


G  E  V  E  R  A  L    I  X  D  E  X  . 


503 


require  nothing  from  other  nations 
more  than  n  recti  reciprocity  .  we  ought 
to  submit  to  nothing  less,  103.  Alac- 
rity in  exercising  their  powers  rela- 
ting to  slaves,  Actof  L808.  American 
vessels  on  the  high  seas.  Louisiana. 
Mississippi  Territory,  152.  Practical 
influence  of  <  longress  on  the  course  of 
the  Judiciary,  2 It).  Resort  to  prece 
dents,  221.  Powers  of  Congress,  un- 
der Const.  U  S.  much  greater  than  the 
British  Legislature  were  ever  permitt- 
ed to  exercise,  227 .  Length  and  ster 
ilitj    ol    their  session,    ( 1822),    265. 

Their  appoint nt  of  Chaplains,  274. 

Their  Constitutional  power  as  to  en- 
couraging u<('ful  inventions.  288,  289. 
Their  authority  over  the  Territories 
uncontested,  137.  Proceedings  at  the 
LstSession  of  the  3rd  Congress,  175)3 
—  17!)  i.  IV.  486—505.  [See  "  Commer- 
cial Resolutions,"  "  Political  Ob- 
servations."] Particular  Acts:  Act 
respecting  Alien  enemies.  6  July  17!)S. 
[1.  Slat.  /..  577.]  II.  L49,  ct  seq. 
IV.  til.  el  seq.  Aci  in  addition  to  an 
••  Act  I'm'  the  punisbmenl  of  certain 
crimes  against  the  t".  S.  "  11  July 
1798,  (  1  Stat.  I..  596.)  [The  Sedition 
Laves.]  II.  I  19,  (l  seq.  iV.  61,  el  seq. 
List  of  Acts  from  1790  to  1815,  passed 
on  application  from  individual  Stales. 
in  pursuance  ol'  Art.  1.  Sec.  10,  of  the 
Constitution,  declaring  that  "  No  State 
shall,  without  the  consent  of  the  ( !on- 
gress,  lay  any  imposts  or  duties  on 
imports  or  exports,  except  what  may 
be  absolutely  necessary  for  executing 
its  inspection  laws.  &c.,"  254,  255. 
Act"lo  limit  the  term  of  office  of  certain 
officers  therein  named,  and  for  other 
purposes,"  5  May  1820.(3  Stat  L.  582.) 
III.  196. 200.  IV.  343.  [See  II.  105,113, 
11.3.  130.  194,  20!).  mit.  429,  4  11.  461. 
4(58,  476,  -178.  -184,  48."..  516,  519,  526, 
530.  531,  533.  574,  575,  591,  592,  596, 
III.  35,  38,  171.  in.-).  196,200,  202,296, 
342,  391,  540,  556,  357.  IV.  220,  221. 
375.] 
"Congressional  Eegister."      Its  faults. 

1.  465,  466.  [See  177.] 
Connecticut.  Supposed  reason  of  her 
not  sending  commissioners  to  Annap- 
olis. I.  245.  24JL  542.  [See  I.  226,  27.".. 
27i;.  2811.  282,  281.  286,  317,  342,  355, 
:!77.  I>.:;.  516,  540.  111.  639.  IV.  225. 
Conquest.  Extent  and  limitations  of 
the  right  of  conquest,  412,  413. 


VOL.    IV. 


38 


Conscience,  the  most  sacred  of  all  pro- 
perty,  IV.  17!). 

ConsoMo  del  Mare,  II.  2:;:;.  2:: I. 
^Consolidate."  The  word  as  ns,.d  in 
the  Address  of  the  Convention  prefix- 
e  I  to  the  Constitution,  contrasted  with 
its  current  and  controversial  applica- 
tion, III.  I  I  J.  443.  IV.  75.  As  appli- 
ed by  Jefferson  to  the  federal  Gov- 
ernment .  320. 

Consolidation.  [See --States  op  the  Un- 
ion."]     [11.520,521.     [V.  458— 460. 

Constantinople,  III.  238.     IV.  479. 

Constitution.  Subjects  proper  for  in- 
hibition in  the  Constitution  of  a  State, 
J.  178.  Advantages  of  the  X.  Vork 
Council  of  Revision,  178.  Considera- 
tions as  ti.  the  periodical  review  of  a 
Constitution,  183,  18 1.  Project  of 
Censors,  184.  A  Constitution  as  much 
a  law  to  the  Legislature,  as  the  A.cts 
of  the  Legislature  are  a  law  to  indi- 
viduals, III.  491.  Distinction  between 
the  authority  of  a  Constitution,  and 
that  of  Public  Opinion,  565.  Author- 
ity of  precedents  and  practice  in  ex- 
pounding a,  Constitution.  5  12.  656. 
IV.  165.  The  best  keys  to  the  true 
objects  of  all  laws  and  Constitutions 
are  furnished  by  the  evils  which  were 
to  be  cured  or  by  the  benefits  to  be 
obtained  ;  and  by  the  immediate  and 
long  continued  application  of  the 
securing  of  these  ends.  III.  (112.  (>'>:>. 
Forced  construction  of  a  Constitution 
for  enlarging  power,  reprobated;  but 
where  the  object  is  indisputably  the 
public  good,  and  certainly  within  the 
policy  of  the  Constitutional  provision, 
a  less  strict,  rule  of  interpretation 
must  be  admitted.  319. 

Constitutions  of  the  several  States  print- 
ed by  order  of  Congress,  1. 185.  [See 
111.  257,  25s.  259,  260  261,  642.] 

Constitution  of  the  United  States. 
[See  "  Common'  Defence  and  General 
Welfare,"  "  Compact. 'u-  Confedera- 
cy," "Convention  at  Annapolis," 
"Convention  at  Philadelphia,"  "Ex- 
ecutive Department,"  "Judiciary," 
"  Legislative  Department,"  "Major- 
ities," ••  Massachusetts,"  "NuLmacA- 
riox."  ••  Precedents,"  ••  Presidential 

ELECTION,"  •'  Roads  and  CaNALSj" "SE- 
CESSION," "  South  Carolina."  •■  Slave- 
ry," "Sovereignty,"  ••  Supreme  Court 
U.S."  "Tariff,"  "United  States,'' 
••  Virginia,"  "  Virginia  Resolutions, 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[COX  —  CON 


&c."  ;' We  the  Peoplb,"  d-c,  &c. 
&c] 

1.  Its  reception  in  Philadelphia, 
N.  York,  P.nsfon.  &c.,  I.  341. 

2.  Its  prospects,  342,  355,  356,  .'i."»7. 
358,  359,  362—367,  437. 

3.  Its  groundwork,  that  the  Federal 
Government,  instead  of  operating  on 
the  Shiles.  should  operate,  without 
their  intervention,  on  the  individuals 
composing  them.  :',  1 1. 

4.  Its  great  objects.  344. 

5.  Degree  of  concord  in  framing  it  a 
miracle,  344.  Executive  Department . 
345. 

6.  Appointments  to  office,  345,  34G. 

7.  Senate,  346. 

8.  Partition  of  power  between  the 
General  and  local  Governments,  346 
—  349. 

9.  Necessity  of  a  check  on  the 
States,  347. 

lit.  A  constitutional  negation  on  the 
laws  of  the  States,  349,  350,  355. 

11.  Conflicting  pretensions  of  the 
little  and  the  large  States,  354. 

12.  Opinions  in  Virginia  and  New 
England  respecting  it  classified,  365, 
381. 

13.  The  three  Southern  States,  367. 
369. 

•  14.  Ratification  of  the  Constitution 
by  Delaware.  Pennsylvania,  N.  Jersey. 
Connecticut.  Georgia  and  Massachu- 
setts, 371).  377. 

15.  The  question  of  its  adoption,  the 
simple  question  whether  the  Union 
shall  or  shall  not  be  continued,  381. 

16.  Obligations  under  it  as  to  the 
old  money,  385,  386. 

17.  Views  as  to  putting  it  into  oper- 
ation. 403,  407,  408. 

18.  Its  ratification  by  Virginia.  401. 
404,  406. 

19.  By  South  Carolina  and  New 
Hampshire,  405. 

20.  By  New  York,  407. 

21.  Difficulties,  -111.  418. 

22.  Objectionable  project  of  anoth- 
er convention,  415,  lis.  4.33,  435. 

23.  Collective  view  of  alterations 
proposed  by  State  Conventions.  423. 

24.  An  expedient  mode  of  amend- 
ments. 428.  417.   I  is. 

2.">.   Desirable  amendments.  CM. 

26.  Importance  of  adopting  the 
new  Constitution.  434,  435. 

27.  Effort  to  place  in  the  hands  of 


disaffected  men  the  administration  of 
the  new  Government,  I.  1 1 1. 

28.  Amendments,  and  the  mode  of 
making  them,  the  two  questions  be- 
fore the  public,  !  12.  [See  i.  463,  473. 
475,  476,  479.  485.  486.] 

29.  Object  of  the  Anti-Federalists, 
I  I.",. 

30.  The  great  bulk  of  the  late  op- 
ponents of  the  Constitution,  at  rest, 
496. 

31.  Reported  proceedings  on  it  of 
Massachusetts.  New  York,  Pennsylva- 
nia, Virginia,  and  North  Carolina,  III. 
544,  552. 

32.  One  hundred  and  twenty  -  six 
amendments  to  it  proposed  by  the 
seven  States  of  Massachusetts.  South 
Carolina.  New  Hampshire.  Virginia, 
New  York.  North  Carolina,  and 
Rhode  Island.  IV.  129. 

33.  Pleonasms.    III.  637. 

34.  The  finish  to  the  style  and  ar- 
rangement of  the  Constitution  given 
by  Gouvernenr  Morris.  169. 

35.  -Not.  like  the  fabled  Goddess 
of  wisdom,  the  offspring  of  a  single 
brain.  It  ought  to  be  regarded  as  the 
work  of  many  heads  and  many  hands," 
341.  342. 

36.  The  Government  of  the  IT.  S. 
being  a  novelty,  and  a  compound,  had 
no  technical  terms,  or  phrases  appro- 
priate to  it :  old  terms  were  to  be 
used  in  new  senses,  explained  by  the 
context  or  by  the  facts  of  the  case, 
209. 

37.  It  is  a  new  creation  :  a  real  non- 
descript, 289,  421.  Sid  generis.  III. 
367.  436.     IV.  2:>7. 

38.  Fundamental  errors  in  suppos- 
ing the  State  Governments  and  the 
General  Government  to  be  parties  to 
the  Constitutional  compact,  is. 

39.  The  people  of  the  United  States, 
respectively  in  their  Sovereign  char- 
acter, and  they  alone,  are  the  real 
parlies  to  it.  18,  19. 

40.  Constitution  of  IT.  S.  neither  a 
National,  nor  a  Federal  one.  but  pos- 
sessing attributes  of  both.  III.  367, 
436. 

41.  Neither  a  Federal  Government, 
created  b>/ the  Stall'  Governments,  like 
the  Revolutionary  Congress,  nor  a 
consolidated  Government,  as  the  term 
is  now  (1830)  applied,  created  by  the 
People  of  U.  S.  as  onecommunity,  and 


c  (i  \  —  OON  j 


(i  i;  X  B  UAL     IN  I)  E  X 


595 


as  such,  acting  as  a  numerical  majority 
of  tht  whole,  LV.75. 

12.  The  Constitution  was  created 
by  the  People:  but  by  the  People  as 
composing  distinct  States,  and  acting 
by  a  majority  in  each.  7.").  95,  240, 
241 . 

■i:;.  Our  Governmental  system  a 
compact,  nut  between  the  Govern- 
ment of  U.S.  and  the  State  Govern- 
ments, but  between  the  States  as  sov- 
ereign communities,  stipulating,  each 
with  the  other,  a  surrender  of  certain 
portions  of  their  respective  authori- 
ties tu  lie  exercised  by  a  common  <  rOV- 
ernment,  and  a  reservation,  for  their 
own  exercise,  of  all  their  other  author- 
ities. III.  223. 

44.  That  it  is  what  it  proposes  to  be, 
area!  Government,  and  not  a  nominal 
one  only,  is  proved  by  the  fact,  that 
it  has  ail  the  practical  attributes  and 
organs  of  a  real,  though  limited, Gov- 
ernment :  a  Legislative.  Executive, 
and  Judicial  Department,  with  the 
physical  means  of  executing  the  par- 
ticular authorities  assigned  to  it.  on 
the  individual  citizens,  in  like  manner 
as  is  done  by  other  Governments,  IV. 
•17. 

45.  The  term  ".  national "  was  sug- 
gested by  the  national  features  con- 
tradistinguishing the  proposed  Gov- 
ernment from  the  Confederacy  which  it 
was  to  supersede.  1.  It  being  estab- 
lished, not  by  the  authority  of  State 
Legislatures,  but  by  the  original  au- 
thority of  the  People  :  2.  In  its  organ- 
ization into  Legislative,  Executive  and 
Judicial  Departments:  3.  In  its  action 
on  the  People  of  the  States  immediately, 
and  not  on  the  Governments  of  the 
States,  as  in  a  Confederacy,  IV.  287, 
320,  321. 

40.  The  People  might,  by  the  same 
authority  and  by  the  same  process, 
have  converted  the  Confederacy  into 
a  new  league  or  treaty  :  or  have  im- 
bodied  the  People  of  their  respective 
Stales  into  one  People.  Nation  or  Sov- 
ereignty :  or.  as  they  did  by  a  mixed 
form,  make  them  one  People,  Nation 
or  Sovereignly  for  certain  purposes, 
and  not  so  for  others.  IV.  293. 

47.  The  Constitution  of  V.  S.  organ- 
izes a  Government  into  the  usual  Leg- 
islative. Executive  and  Judiciary  De- 
partments :  invests  it  with  specified 
powers,  leaving  others  to  the  parties 


to  the  Constitution:  makes  the  Gov- 
ernment operate  directly  on  '/"  People) 

place-  ai  its  command  the  needfu 
physical  means  of  executing  it-  pow- 
er- :  and  finally  proclaims  lis  suprem- 
acy and  that  of  the  laws  made  under 
ii.  over  the  Constitutions  and  laws  of 
the  Stales  :  the  powers  of  tin/  (  lovertl- 
mrnl  being  exercised,  as  in  other  elec- 
tive and  responsible  Governments, 
under  the  control  of  its  constituents, 
the  People  and  Legislatures,  of  the 
States,  and  subject  to  the  Revolution- 
ary rights  of  the  people  ill  extreme 
cases.  IV.  293.  294. 

-is.  The  operation  of  the  Constitu- 
tion is  the  same,  whether  its  authority 
be  derived  from  the  People  collective- 
ly, of  all  the  States,  as  one  communi- 
ty, or  from  the  People  of  the  several 
Slates,  who  were  the  parties  to  it. 
294. 

4!).  Without  an  annulment  of  the 
Constitution  itself  its  supremacy  must 
be  submitted  to.  294 

50.  The  only  distinctive  effect  as  be- 
tween the  two  modes  of  forming  a 
<  lonstitution  by  authority  of  the  Peo- 
ple  is.  that  if  formed  by  them,  as  'un- 
bodied into  separate  communities,  as  iu 
the  case  of  Constitution  of  U.  S.,  a 
dissolution  of  Hie  Constitutional  com- 
pact would  replace  them  in  the  condi- 
tion of  separate  communities,  that  be- 
ing the  condition  in  which  they  enter- 
ed into  the  compact ;  whereas,  if  form- 
ed by  the  People  as  one  community, 
acting  as  such  by  a  numerical  major- 
ity, a  dissolution  of  the  compact  would 
reduce  them  to  a  state  of  nature,  as  so 
many  individual  persons,  2!i4,  391. 
392. 

51.  But  while  the  Constitutional 
compact  remains  undissolved,  it  must 
lie  executed  according  to  the  forms 
and  provisions  specified  in  the  com- 
pact. 294. 

52.  As  the  Government  of  the  Con- 
federacy operated,  within  the  extent 
of  its  authority,  through  requisitions 
on  the  Confederated  Stales,  and  rested 
on  the  sanction  of  Slate  Legislatures, 
the  Government  to  take  its  place  was 
to  operate,  within  the  extent  of  its 
powers,  directly  and  coercively  on  in- 
dividuals, and  to  receive  the  higher 
sanction  of  the  People  of  tin1  States, 
III.  5211.  521. 

53.  The    two    vital    characteristics 


596 


G  E  X  E  It  A  L     I  X  I)  E  X  . 


[cox 


of  the  political  system  of  U.  S. 
are,  first,  that  the  Government  holds 
jis  powers  by  a  charter  granted 
to  it  by  the  People  :  second,  that  the 
powers  of  Government  are  formed 
into  two  grand  divisions  one  vested 
in  a  Governmenl  over  the  whole  com- 
munity, the  other  in  a  number  of  in- 
dependent Governments  over  its  com- 
ponenl  parts,  IV.  138,  139. 

54.  Neither  a  simple  Government 
>uir  a  mere  league  of  Governments, 
but  essentially  different  from  both. 
61. 

55.  The  Constitution  divides  the 
sovereignty  :  the  portions  surrendered 
by  the  Siaies  composing  the  Federal 
Sovereignty  over  specified  subjects: 
the  portions  retained  forming  the  Sov- 
ereignty of  each  Stale,  over  the  re- 
siduary subjects  within  its  sphere,  61, 
96. 

5G.  It  has  created  a  Government  in 
as  strict  a  sense  of  the  term  as  the 
Governments  of  the  States  created  by 
their  respective  Constitutions,  and 
with  the  same  attributes.  Its  opera- 
tion is  to  be  directly  on  persons  and 
things  in  the  one  Government,  as  in 
the  others,  62,  75.  It  has,  like  them, 
the  command  of  a  physical  force,  for 
executing  the  powers  committed  to  it, 
75,  96. 

57.  It  is  a  Constitution  which  makes 
a  Government:  a  Government  which 
makes  laws  :  laws  which  operate,  like 
the  laws  of  all  other  Governments, 
by  a  penal  and  physical  force,  on  the 
individuals  subject  to  the  laws  :  and 
finally  laws  declared  to  be  the  Su- 
preme law  of  the  land,  any  thing 
in  the  Constitution  or  laws  of 
the  individual  States  notwithstanding, 
419,  1-0. 

58.  The  powers  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment exceed  those  ever  allowed 
by  the  Colonies  to  G.  r>.-  particularly 
the  power  of  taxation.  208. 

.Mi.  The  Constitution  Of  V.  S.  being 
a  compact  among  individuals  as  ini- 
bodied  into  States,  no  State  can  at 
pleasure  release  itself  therefrom  and 
set  up  for  itself.  The  compact  can  be 
dissolved,  only  by  the  consent  of  ihe 
other  parties,  or  by  usurpations  or 
abuses  of  power  justly  having  that  ef- 
fect, 64,  !)(!. 

60.  Being  derived  from  the  same 
source    as    the   Constitutions   of    the 


State,,  it  has  within  each  State  the 
same  authority  as  i],..  <  lonstitution  of 

Ihe  Slate.  75,  96. 

61.  Being  a  compact  among  the 
Siate-.  in  their  highest  Soi  ereign  ca- 
pacity, ami  constituting  the  People 
thereof  one  People  for  certain  purpos- 
es, it  is  noi  revocable  nor  alterable  at 

the  will  of  the  Stales  individually,  as 
the  < institution  of  a  Slate  is  revoca- 
able  and  alterable  at  its  individual 
will.  75. 

62.  Ji  was  proposed  to  the  People 
of  the  Stales  as  a  whole,  and  unani- 
mously adopted  by  the  States  as  a 

wJwle,  on    reciprocal    c :essions  :    it 

being  a  part  of  the  Constitution  that 
not  less  than  three  fourths  should  be 
competent  to  make  any  alteration  in 
what  had  been  unanimously  agreed  to, 
lu.'.  to:;. 

<>:>.  In  two  cases  unanimity  \<  re- 
quired :  1.  That  no  amendment  made 
prior  to  the  year  1808,  shall  affect  the 
provision  in  the  first  clause,  in  section 
'.i  of  Art.  I.,  respecting  ihe  migration 
or  importation  of  such  persons  "  as 
any  of  the  States  new  existing  shall 
think  proper  to  admit  ;  "  and  the 
provision  in  the  fourth  clause  of 
the  same  section  and  article  concern- 
ing "  a  capitation,  or  other  direct  lax.'1 
'J.  ■•  That  no  Stale,  without  its  consent, 
shall  be  deprived  of  iis  equal  suffrage 
in  the  Senate."  Hi'.'.  L03. 

li  1.  Question,  to  be  determined  by 
time,  as  to  the  tendency  of  ihe  Con- 
stitution ',o  an  oppressive  aggrandize- 
ment of  the  General  Government,  or 
an  anarchical  independence  of  the 
State  Governments,  III.  246, 

65.  Considerations  arising  from  the 
size  of  ihe  Slates,  the  number  of  them. 

the  Territorial  extent  of  Ihe  whole, 
and  the  degree  of  external  danger, 
246,  '-'IT. 

(ifi.  Whether  the  centripetal  or  cen- 
trifugal tendency  of  the  Government 
of  V.  S.  be  the  greater,  is  a  problem 
which  experience  is  to  decide  :  but  it 
depends,  not  on  the  mode  of  the 
grant,  but  on  the  extent  and  effect 
of  the  powers  granted.  IV.  123,  424. 

liT.  Success,  hitherto,  of  the  new 
and  compound  polity  of  U.  S.  beyond 
any  former  one.   I.'  I. 

lis.  lis  beneficent  operation,  for  a 
long  period,  in  iis  twofold  character 
of  a  Government  for  the  Union  and  a 


CON  —  CON] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


597 


Government  for  each  of  the  Stair-,  is 
evidence  of  its  having  solved  propiti- 
ously for  the  destinies  of  man  the  prob- 
lem ol  his  capacity  for  self  govern- 
ment, 348. 

69.  No  defects  in  it.  as  yd  discov- 
ered, which  do  not  admit  of  remedies 
compatible  with  its  vital  principles 
and  characteristic  features,  424.  4  •_.">. 

70.  To  deny  the  possibility  of  ;i 
system  partly  Federal  and  partly  Con- 
solidated, and  to  attempt  to  convert 
the  Government  of  U.  S.  into  one 
either  wholly  Federal,  or  wholly  Con- 
solidated, is  to  aim  a  deadly  blow  at 
the  la.si  hope  of  true  liberty  on  the 

lace  of  the  earth.  425. 

70.  The  Constitution  is  too  strong 
in  its  text,  in  the  uniformity  of  official 
construction,  and  in  the  maturity  of 

public  opinion,  to  be  successfully  as- 
sailed  }>\   the  attempts  of  party  zeal. 

&c  in.  601. 

71.  Distracted  and  ominous  condi- 
tion from  which  it  rescued  the  coun- 
try. IV.  390. 

72.  Happy  fruits  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, 389,  390.     "  Esto  perpetua,"  390. 

Boundaries  of  power: 

73.  Provision  for  a  peaceable  and 

authoritative  decision  of  controversies 
as  to  the  landmarks  of  jurisdiction 
between  the  General  and  the  State 
Governments,  obviously  essential,  47, 
7."..  97,  425. 

74.  The  provision  cannot  be  either 
peaceable  or  effective  by  making  eve- 
ry part  an  authoritative  umpire,  75, 
97,  425. 

75.  Conclusive  objections  to  leave 
the  decision  to  the  States  as  parties 
to  the  Constitution.  97,  98.  Why  ne- 
gotiation could  not  be  substituted  for 
Governmental  authority,  47,  98. 

7G.  The  authority  for  terminating 
disagreements  concerning  the  line  of 
division  between  Federal  and  State 
powers,  ought  to  be  in  the  General 
Government,  III.  223,  224,  325.  IV. 
142. 

77.  According  to  the  actual  provis- 
ion, the  Constitution  and  laws  of  U. 
S.  are  declared  to  be  paramount  to 
those  of  the  individual  States,  and  an 
appellate  Supremacy  is  vested  in  the 
Judicial  power  of  U.  S.,  75,  76,  98, 
99,  216.  Delicacy  of  the  relation  be- 
tween the  Federal  and  State  Courts, 


and  the  line  dividing   the  cases  within 
their  respective  jurisdictions,  119. 

78.  Controversies  respecting  tin' 
boundaries  of  power  between  the 
General  Government  and  the  State 
Governments,  to  lie  decided  by  the 
SupremeCourt  of  U.  S.,  IV.  19. 

79.  On  the  boundary  of  jurisdiction 
between  the  several  Slates  and  the 
United  Suites,  the  -last  re.-ort ,"  within 
the  purview  and  forms  of  the  Consti- 
tion,  is  to  the  Supreme  Court  U.  S.  : 
Distinguished  from  the  "  last  resort" 
in  ultra-constitutional  cases,  205,  206, 
224,  22."..  317,  318. 

80.  This  distinction  is  the  same 
within  the  several  States.  206. 

81.  The  final  appeal  must  be  to  the 
wliole,  425.  This  view  was  taken 
while  the  Constitution  of  U.  S.  was 
under  the  consideration  of  the  People, 
425.  ll  dictated  the  provision  in  Art. 
(I.  declaring  that  the  Constitution  and 
laws  of  l'  S.  should  be  the  Supreme 
law  of  the  land,  any  thing  in  the  Con- 
stitution or  laws  of  any  of  the  States 
to  the  contrary  notwithstanding,  425. 

82.  And  also  the  provision  in  Arti- 
cle J.  prohibiting  ceitain  acts  and 
powers  to  the  States  :  among  them 
any  laws  violating  the  obligation  of 
contracts.  425. 

83.  The  same  view  dictated  the  ap- 
pellate provision  in  the  Judicial  Act 
passed  by  the  first  Congress  under 
the  Constitution.  [Act  to  establish  the 
Judicial  Courts  of  U.  S..  September  24, 
1789.  Sec.  25.  Stat.  L.  I.  85,  86.] 
IV.  425. 

84.  This  view  will  be  permanently 
taken  of  it.  with  a  surprise  hereafter 
that  any  other  should  ever  have  been 
contended  for.  425. 

85.  Imperfection  of  the  classifica- 
tion of  Constitutional  powers  into  ex- 
ternal and  internal,  as  expressing  the 
division  between  Federal  and  State 
powers,  2")li.  257. 

86.  Epochs  of  encroachments  by 
the  General  Government  and  by  the 
States.   III.  2Ai\. 

87.  Alternate  popularity  and  un- 
popularity of  each  of  the  great  bran- 
ches of  the  Federal  Government.  IV. 
430. 

88.  Vicissitudes  in  the  apparent 
tendencies  in  the  Federal  and  State 
Governments  to  encroach  each  on 
the  authorities  of  the  other,  430. 


598 


GENERAL     IXH E X . 


[CON  —  COM 


89,  The  powers  of  declaring  a  state 
of  war.  of  raising  armies,  and  of  cre- 
ating offices,  expressly  and  exclusive- 
ly in  ( Congress,  194. 

!)ii.  Difficulty,  in  certain  cases,  in 
distinguishing  the  exacl  boundary  be- 
tween Legislative  and  Executive  pow- 
ers, 195. 

ill.  Precedents  where  the  line  of 
separation  between  these  powers  has 
nui  been  sufficiently  regarded,  495. 

!)•_'.  Criterioo  in  such  cases,  for  dis- 
tinguishing between  the  real  and  the 
ostensible  friend  of  the  Constitution 
and  of  liberty,  495. 

93.  The  ••  Gordiao  knot"  of  the 
Constitution  semis  to  lie  in  the  prob- 
lem of  collision  between  the  Federal 

and  Slate  powers,  especially  as  event- 
ually exercised  by  their  respective 
tribunals.  If  the  knot  cannot  be  un- 
tied by  the  test  of  the  Constitution,  it 
ougbt'not  certainly  to  be  cut  by  any 
political  Alexander,  1 1  J.  222,  223. 

94.  On  the  abstract  question,  wheth- 
er the  Federal  or  the  State  decisions 
ought  to  prevail,  the  sounder  policy 
would  yield  to  the  claims  of  the  Fed- 
eral decisions,  223. 

95.  Consequence  from  the  co-ordi- 
nate relations  of  the  Legislative,  Ex- 
ecutive, and  Judicial  Departments  to 
each  other  and  their  relations  to  the 
Constitution,  IV.  349.  .Mutual  duty 
of  their  respective  functionaries,  &c, 
349,  3l>0.  [See  "  Jcmciary  Depart- 
ment.?'] 

Interpretation  : 
9G.  Doubts   and    difficulties   in   ex- 
pounding the  Constitution.  IV.  147. 

97.  The  true  course  of  construction 
is  intermediate  between  regarding  it 
as  a  single  Government,  with  powers 
co-extensive  with  the  General  wel- 
fare, and  as  an  ordinary  statute  to  be 
construed  with  the  strictness  almost 
of  a  penal  one,  I  IT.     III.  146, 

98.  Real  measure  of  the  powers 
meant  to  be  granted  to  Congress  by 
the  Convention  at  Philadelphia,  is  to 
lie  sought  in  the  specifications.  These 
are  to  be  expounded,  not  with  the 
strictness  applied  to  an  ordinary  stat- 
ute by  a  Court  of  law,  or  with  a  lati- 
tude which,  under  the  name  of  means 
for  carrying  into  execution  a  limited 
Government,  would  transform  it  into 
a  Government  without  limiK  IV.  74. 

99.  A  frequent  error  in  expounding 


the  Constitution  has  been  to  seek  its 
meaning,  by  viewing  it.  some  through 
the  medium  of  a  simple  Government, 
others  through  thai  of  a  mere  league 
of  ( iovernments.  It  is  neither  :  and 
must  he  iis  own  interpreter,  (il. 

100.  The  proper  way  to  understand 
our  novel  and  complex'  system  of 
( fovernmenl  is  to  avoid,  as  much  as 
may  lie.  the  use  of  technical  terms 
and  phrases  appropriate  to  otlll  t 
forms,  and  to  examine  the  process  of 
its  formation,  the  peculiarity  of  its 
Structure,  and  the  limitation  and  dis- 
tribution of  il<  power-.   171. 

101.  The  Constitution  is  a  compact, 
to  lie  expounded  according  to  the  pro- 
vision for  expounding  it.  The  ex- 
pounding provision  is  a  pari  of  the 
compact,  ami  as  obligatory  as  any 
other  part  of  it.  103,  lot. 

l(i_.  The  political  vocabulary 
not  furnish  terms  sufficiently  distinct- 
ive and  appropriate  for  the  peculiar 
system  of  Government  of  l".  S..  85. 

Ki3.  Obvious  and  jusl  guides  fur 
expounding  the  Constitution :  /'.  Evils 

and  defects  for  curing  which  the  Con- 
stitution  was  called  for  and  intro- 
duced.    ;;.  Comments    prevailing    al 

the  time  when  it  was  adopted.  7  1.    Hi. 

Early,  deliberate  and  continued  prac- 
tice under  the  ( lonstitution,  &c,  74. 

101.  A  key  to  the  legitimate  mean- 
ing of  the  Constitution  to  lie  sought 
in  the  text  itself:  and  in  the  sense  at- 
tached io  it  by  the  People  in  their  re- 
spective Sia  e  Conventions  which  rat- 
ified it.  111.  228,  142. 

105.  it  can  lie  found  only  •■  in  the 
proceedings  of  the  Convention,  the 
co-temporary  expositions,  and  above 
all  in  the  ratifj  ing  <  inventions  of  the 
States," 521.  ".'-'2.     IV.  72,  111. 

10(1.  The  lies!  key  to  the  text  of  the 
Constitution,  as  of  a  law.  is  to  he 
found  in  the  contemporary  state  of 
things,  and  the  maladies  or  deficien- 
cies which  were  to  lie  provided  tor, 
III.  rail.     [V.74. 

107.  Intention  of  the  parties  to  the 
Constitution,  2  13. 

los.  Caution  in  consulting  the  con- 
temporary writings  which  vindicated 
A.c.  the  Constitution,  III.  136. 

lo'.i.  It  is  the  duty  of  all  to  support 
the  Constitution  in  its  true  meaning, 
as  understood  by  the  nation  at  the 
time  of  its  ratification,  245. 


CO  \'  —  0  0  N  ] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


509 


110.  Genera]  forms  or  phrases  used 
in  the  introductory  propositions  sub- 
mitted i"  the  Convention,  not  meant 
in  be  inserted  in  their  loose  form 
in  the  text  of  the  I  Constitution,  367. 

Ml.  Muii'  reasonable  and  just  in 
interpret  the  name  or  title  of  the 
Constitution  by  facts  mi  the  face  of 
it.  than  in  torture  the  facts  by  a  bed 
(it  Procrustes  into  a  fitness  to  the 
title,  IV.  287, 

1 12.  In  expounding  the  Constitution 
the  distinction  between  the  usurpation 
ami  the  abuse  of  a  power,  to  be  kept 
in  view,  III.  573.     IV.  238. 

113.  Distinction  between  assump- 
tions i>i  power  by  tin'  General  Gov- 
ernment, in  opposition  to  the  will  of 
tin'  <  Constituent  body,  ami  assumptions 
by  tin1  Constituent  body  through  tin' 
Governmenl  as  the  organ  of  its  will, 
III.  506,  529,  530,  551,  565.     IV.  7:;. 

111.  The  remedy  in  each  case,  III. 
." 507. 

I  i.'i.  Sources  of  bias  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  Constitution,  54.  Dang- 
er to  its  genuine  sense  from  latitude 
of  construction,  ami  use  made  of  pre- 
cedents,  even  when  they  may  hat  e 
crept  in  inadvertently;  from  ••  mid- 
night "  precedents;  and  from  the  influ- 
ence oi'  the  usefulness  ami  popularity 
of  measures  on  questions  of  their  con- 
Btitutionality,  56. 

llti.  Latitudinary  mode  of  expound- 
ing it  in  the  case  of  M'Cuttoh  v.  Mary- 
land, 14:}. 

117.  Error   from   the  use  made  of 

the  g] ies  of  Sovereignty  implied  in 

the  nature  of  Government.  1-lii. 

118.  Reasonable  medium  between 
two  extreme  rules  of  construction, 
146. 

119  The  language  of  the  Constitu- 
tution  is  undergoing  interpretations 
unknown  to  its  founders,  e.  g.  the 
word  ■•Consolidate.**  -112.  [See  "LAN- 
GUAGE."] 

120.  Temptation  of  ••  utility,"  the 
most  dangerons  snare  for  constitution- 
al authority.  183,  565. 

121.  Temptations  of  interest.  5G5. 

122.  Spirit  of  party,  565. 

1_:;,  Constructive  innovations,  245. 
License  of  construction  applied  to  it, 
506. 

121.  If  every  exercise  of  a  power 
not  named  in  the  grant  was  under- 
stood to  be  prohibited,  which  of  the 


granted  powers  might  not  In-  without 
the  necessary  ami  proper  means  of  at- 
taining its  end?    IV.  2  11.  2  12. 

125.  A  construction  of  the  Consti- 
tution practised  on  or  acknowledged 
lor  a  period  of  nearly  forty  years,  has 
received  a  national  sanction  not  to  be 
reversed,  but  by  an  evidence  al  leas  t 
equivalent  to  the  national  will.  III. 
:<7:;. 

126.  Effect  of  a  disregard  by  every 
new  Congress  of  a  meaning  of  the 
Constitution  uniformly  sustained  by 
their  predecessors,  57  l. 

Parth'i(l<tr    provisions  ;    Powers  not 
granted;  "  We  the  people:  " 

127.  Import,  in  its  actual  connexion, 
of  the  phrase  ••  Common   defence  and 

general  .welfare,"  in  the  Preamble  to 
the  Constitution.  III.  657.  [See  "Com- 
mon DEFENCE  AND  GENERAL  WELFARE."] 

128.  Serious  aspect  of  the  doctrine 
limiting  the  claim  under  the  terms 
••common  defence  and  general  wel- 
fare."' to  the  mere  appropriation  of 
lin  nicy.  508. 

129.  The  Provision  in  Art.  [,  sec.  7. 
respecting  the  presenting-  of  hills  to 
the  President,  meant  to  allow  ade- 
quate time  to  him  for  considering 
them,  and  to  Congress  for  considering 
Ac  his  objections,  IV.  299. 

130.  A  disregard  on  either  side  of 
what  it  owes  to  the  other,  must  be  an 
abuse  for  which  it  would  be  responsi- 
ble under  the  forms  of  the  Coustitu- 
tution,  299. 

131.  In  the  case  of  the  President, 
under  given  circumstances,  a  ground 
of  impeachment.  299,  300. 

1''2.  Nothing  short  of  the  signature 
of  the  President  ;  or  a  lapse  of  ten 
days  without  a  return  of  his  object- 
ion- ;  or  an  overruling  of  the  object- 
ions by  two  thirds  of  each  House  of 
Congress  ;  can  give  legal  validity  to 
a  bill,  300, 

133.  The  objects  of  the  Veto  pow- 
er. 369. 

134.  History  of  the  clause  in  Art.  I. 
Sec.  8,  vesting  in  Congress  (he  power 
••  to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  &c.," 
III.  656,  657. 

1  :;.">.  The  notoriety  of  intention  a 
reason  why  the  Constitution  was  not 
made  more  free  from  a  charge  of  un- 
certainty in  its  meaning  in  this  in- 
stance, 057,  C58. 


GOO 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[CON  —  C  O  N 


136.  Meaning  of  the  "  power  to  reg- 
ulate Commerce,"  vested  in  Congress 
by  Constitution  U.S.,  Art.  T.  See.  8.,  571. 

137.  The  particular  expression  of 
the  power,  ••  to  pay  the  debts  of  the 
United  States,"  in  Art.  I.  Sec.  8,  orig- 
inated in  a  cautious  regard  t<>  debts 
of  the  United  States  antecedent  to 
the  radical  change  in  the  Federal 
Government;  and  bui  for  that  con- 
sideration, no  particular  expression 
of  the  appropriating  power  would 
probably  have   been  thought  of,  IV. 

123,  124,  i:;i. 

138.  The  power  to  regulate  trade 
to  be  expounded  in  the  sense  in 
which  it  has  been  usually  taken,  as 
shown  by  the  purposes  to  which  it 
has  been  usually  applied,  3. 

139.  Tower  granted  in   Art.  I.  Sec. 

8,  to  establish  Post  Roads,  II.  89. 

140.  Clause  in  Art.  I.  See.  8.  grant- 
ing to  Congress  exclusive  jurisdiction 
over  such  a  District  not  exceeding 
ten  miles  square  as  might  by  cession 
and  acceptance  become  the  seat  of 
Government  of  U.S..  III.  219. 

111.  It  is  an  anomaly  in  our  Repre- 
sentative System.  220. 

142.  Power  granted  to  Congress  in 
Art.  I.  Sec.  8,  "  to  make  all  laws 
which  shall  be  necessary  and  proper," 
for  the  execution  of  enumerated  pow- 
ers and  of  powers  vested  by  the  Con- 
stitution in  the  Government  of  U.  S., 
III.  220,  221. 

143.  Key  to  the  intention  of  the 
framers  of  the  C.  in  the  clause  in 
Art.  I.  Sec.  9,  relating  to  "  the  migra- 
tion and  importation  of  persons,"'  149. 
150.  This  clause  refers  exclusively  to 
a  migration,  &c,  from  other  countries 
to  U.S.,  and  not  to  a  removal,  &c,  of 
slaves  or  freemen  from  one  to  another 
part  of  U.  S..  150,  151,  1U5. 

141.  Why  the    clause  in  Art.  I.  Sec. 

9.  prohibiting  a  tax  on   exports   was 
adopted.  (MO. 

145.  The  evil  which  produced  the 
provisions  in  Art.  I.  Sec.  lit.  declaring 
that,  "  no  State  shall  issue  Hills  of 
credit,"  nor  "  make  any  thing  but 
gold  and  silver  coin  &C,  tender  in 
payment  of  debts."  nor  pass  any  law 
■•  impairing  the  obligation  of  con- 
tracts." was  the  practice  of  the  States 
in  making  bills  of  credit,  and  in  some 
instances  appraised  property  "a  legal 
tender,"  fto.,  IV.  160,  328. 


1  It;.  Notes  of  S  ate  Banks,  if  not 
made  a  legal  tender,  do  not  fall  with- 
in the  prohibitory  clause,  1  60. 

117.  Clause  in  Art.  I.  Sec.  L0,  pro- 
hibiting a  State  from  passing  l,any 
law  impairing  the  obligation  of  con- 
tracts,"  17. 

148.  True  construction  of  Kit!) 
of  Art.  I.  prohibiting  a  State   from 
laying    imposts    without    consent    of 
(  long ress,  &c,  III.  643. 

1  19.  Abortive  projects  for  separate 
regulation-  of  trade.  ■■  superseded  for 
the  moment  by  that  of  the  Conven- 
tion at  Annapolis  in  1786,  ami  i-ot:- 
kvki;  by  the  Convention  at  Philadel- 
phia in  17s7.  and  the  CONSTITl  i  [ON 
which  was  the  fruit  of  it.   646." 

150.  The  object  for  which  the  con- 
sent of  Congress  to  such  imposts  was 
made  grantable  :  viz.  such  improve- 
ment in  harbours  and  other  i 
having,  like  their  inspection  laws,  re- 
lation to  their  maritime  commerce,  as 
particular  States  might  have  a  local 
interest  in  making,  apart  from,  or  in 
addition  to, Federal  provisions.  IV. 251. 

151.  The  use  of  the  power  and  the 
applications  for  its  exercise,  prove  that 
it  was  not  understood  to  be  for  en- 
couraging State  manufactures.  254, 
255.  Acts  of  Congress  on  the  subject, 
1790—1815,  254. 

152.  Construction  of  Art.  II.  Sec. 
3,  giving  the  President  power  "  to  (ill 
up  all  vacancies  that  may  happen  du- 
ring the  recess  of  the  Senate,"  351, 
352.  353. 

153.  The  term  "  all  "  embraces  both 
foreign  and  municipal  cases.  351. 

154.  Defective  analogy.  Extent  of 
power  in  municipal  cases.  351. 

155.  Effect  in  municipal  cases  of  a 
literal  rule  of  interpretation,  351. 

156.  Practical  construction  extend- 
ing the  power,  in  cases  of  necessity 
or  urgency,  to  vacancies  happening 
to  exist  in  the  recess  of  the  Senate. 
though  not  coming  into  existence  in 
the  recess.  351. 

157.  Supposed  cases.  Opinion  of 
Wirt,  Attorney  General,  351, 

158.  The  reasons  for  the  construct- 
ion more  cogent  in  the  case  of  public 
functionaries  sent  to  a  foreign  coun- 
try. 352. 

159.  Imputation,  on  a  contrary  con- 
struction, on  the  framers  and  latitiers 
of  the  Constitution,  352. 


cox] 


G E N B UAL    INDEX 


601 


160.  The  consti  notion  in  favorof  the 
power  ii"i  mure  liberal  thau  would 
be  applied  to  a  remedial  Statute,  352. 

L61.  A  rejection   of  il   would   ex- 
clude  tin-   function,   in   given   i 
from  the  political  system  of  U.S.,  352. 

L62.  To  regard  the  power  of  ap- 
pointing the  highesl  functionaries  em- 
ployed in  foreign  missions,  though  a 
Bpecific,  &c.,  provision  of  the  Consti- 
tution, as  incidental  merely,  in  any 
case,  to  a  subordinate  power,  that  of 
a  provisional  negotiation  by  the  Pres- 
ident alone,  would  be  a  more  strain- 
ed construction  of  the  text,  than  that 
here  gi\  en  to  il .  352. 

163.  No  distinction,  in  principle, 
between  missions  to  foreign  courts,  to 
which  there  had  before  been  appoint- 
ments and  to  which  there  had  nol 
been,  352.  Stations  al  foreign  courts 
and  special  negotiations,  353.  Illus- 
trations, Practice  of  the  Govern- 
menl  of  U.  S.,  353.  The  legitimacy 
of  the  power,  or  its  general  utility, 
not    invalidated   by   a  misuse  of   it, 

164.  Clause  in  Art.  IV.  Sec.  3.  pro- 
viding that  ■•  new  States  may  be  ad- 
mitted by  the  Congress  into  the 
Union."  171.  393- 

165.  Questions  of  construction  in 
the  case  of  after  acquired,  as  distin- 
guished from  original,  domain.  Case 
of  Louisiana,  171. 

166.  Clause  in  Art.  IV.  Sec  3,  giv- 
ing power  "to  make  all  needful  rules 
and  regulations  respecting  the  terri- 
tory or  other  property  belonging  to 
U.  S.."III.  152,  176. 

1(17.  These  terms  of  a  "  ductile 
character."  Their  construction,  152, 
153. 

168.  1 1  tH  Amendment,  against  ex- 
tending judicial  power  of  U.  S.  to 
Suits  against  a  Stale.  221,  222. 

169.  Power  of  making  war  and 
treaties  not  Executive  powers,  I.  G13 
—619. 

170.  Authority  in  (lie  General  Gov- 
ernment to  make  canals,  repeatedly 
proposed  in  the  Convention  of  I7s7. 
and  negatived.  435.  Disclaimed  by 
Hamilton  in  his  Report  as  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  III.  436. 

171.  The  General  Government 
ought  to  forbear  to  exercise  doubtful 
powers,  436. 


172.  Want  of  a  provision  for  the 
surrender  of  malefactors,  220. 

17:;.  Mere  inequality  in  imposing 
i  axes,  or  in  other  Legislative  acts,  not 
synonymous  to  unconstitutionality* 
574. 

17  1.  A  University  within  the  I ii- 
trict  of  <  !olumbia,  constitutional,  631. 

175.  Pleonasms,  tautologies,  Ac,  in 
the  i  !onstitution,  637, 

17(i.  A  liberal  and  steady  course  of 
practice  alone  capable  of  reconciling 
provisions  literally  at,  variance  from 
each  other.     Example,  222. 

Aim  ml  mi  nts  suggested: 

177.  President  Monroe's  suggest- 
ion to  Congress  to  recommend  to  the 
States  the  adoption  oi  an  amendment 

to   the   Constitution,  which   shall   give 

tot  longress  the  right  of  establishing  a 
system  of  Internal  Improvements,  51. 

178.  Policy  of  such  an  amendment, 
P7.92,  93. 

1 7 : » .  Defects  of  the  existing  provis- 
ion for  electing  a  President,  III.  332. 

180.  Sketch  of  a.  substitute  for  it, 
335. 

181  Questions  as  to  certain  sug- 
gested amendments,  answered,  IV. 
507,  508,  529,  .">:io.     See  569. 

182.  .1.  Hillhouse's  proposed  amend- 
ments, IV.  77-  -80. 

183.  Suggested  amendment  for  using 
the  Public  Lauds,  as  a  resource 
for  colonizing  the  colored  population. 
214,  2i:>. 

is  I.  Cautions  to  be  observed  in 
making  changes  in  the  Constitution, 
343.  [See  III.' fill'.  655,  656.   1V.339.] 

Consuls,  Commercial,  [See  "Offic- 
ers."] Constitutional  question  con- 
cerning them.  III.  296.  Why  the  place 
of  a  Consul  is  not  an  office  in  the  Con- 
stitutional sense  of  the  term.  IV.  350 
—:;:>:;. 

Consuls,  Roman,  I.  39G. 

Consurm  rs,  IV.  28. 

Continental  Congress.    [See  "  Congress 

or  THE  <  lONFEDERACT."] 

Continental   Money,  I.  60,  61. 
Contraband,   II.  52.  53,  85,  87, 190,  265. 

321,  370.  371,  385.     IV.  434,  146. 
Controversy.   A  suggestion  of  "  Softer 

words  and    harder   arguments,"  III. 

305. 
Convention.    Project  of  a  Continental 

Convention,  I.  118.     Objection  to  two 

Conventions  sitting  at  the  same  time 


602 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[con  —  C  O  N 


with  powers  in  part  concurrent  Sug- 
gestion for  removing  the  embarrass- 
ment, 237.  Reported  proceedings  of 
the  Conventions  of  Massachusetts, 
New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Virginia, 
and  North  <  larolina,  on  the  Consti- 
tution of  lr.  S.,  III.  .ill,  552.  Second 
Convention  of  North  Carolina,  59S. 
The  Hartford  Convention.  Dwight's 
"  History  of "  it.  IV.  340.  Probable 
call  of  a  ••  Southern  Convention."  lis 
evils.  "Aspirations  for  the  honours, 
Arc,  &c,  presented  to  ambition  on  a 
new  political  theatre,  w ould "  be 
found  "germinating  in  such  a  hot- 
bed." 21  (i.  217.  The  project  of  a 
"Southern  Convention"  insidiously  re- 
vived, 301. 

Convention  of  1780  at  Annapolis, 
[See  "Annapolis,"  "  Virginia."] 
Proposition  of  Virginia  for  a  Conven- 
tion of  deputies  from  the  Slates,  com- 
missioned to  devise  and  report  a  uni- 
form system  of  Commercial  Regula- 
tions, ill.  587,  Annapolis  selected  as 
the  place  of  meeting,  and  why.  I. 
225,  226.  Importance  of  this  Conven- 
tion, 22(1.  227.  Preferable  to  a  grad- 
ual correction  of  the  vices  of  the  Con- 
federation, 228,  229.  Slates  which 
have  appointed  Delegates  to  the  C, 
245.  Suggested  explanation  of  the 
omission  of  other  States  to  send  Dep- 
uties, 245,  21G.  Discouraging  pros- 
pect that  the  meeting  can  be  made 
subservient  to  a  Plenipotentiary 
Convention  for  amending  the  Consti- 
tution, 246.  Movement  in  Virginia, 
217.  248.  Prospect  of  the  breaking 
up  of  the  meeting,  250.  Report  of 
Virginia  Delegates,  252.  Unanimous 
agreement  of  II.  I),  to  the  recommen- 
dation of  a  general  revision  of  the 
Federal  system,  253,  251).  [See  III. 
646.] 

Convention  at  Philadelphia  for 
amending  i  uk  federal  constitl  i  [on. 
[See  "  Sates,  Robert,"  ]  Materials 
for  an  ample  view  of  its  proceedings, 
III.  22S.  It  grew  out  ol  the  Conven- 
tion at  Annapolis,  in  August  17m;. 
recommended  by  Virginia,  in  the 
preceding  winter,  521.  Delegates  to 
it  from  Virginia,  I.  275.  Appoint- 
ments to  it.  27."..  281,  284,  328.  Diffi- 
culties of  the  experiment.  284,  2S.~>. 
Alarming  symptoms.  285.  Proper 
foundations  of  the  new  system.  2.s">. 
2SG,  317.     Prospect  of  a  full  meeting. 


.".17.  Difficulties  and  doubt-.  :;17.  A 
quorum  formed,  328,  329.  Gen. 
Washington  elected  President,  and 
.Major  Jackson  Secretary.  <  Committee 
for  preparing  rules.  321.  List  of 
members,  331.  Proceeding  -  si  cret, 
332.  Diligence,  338.  Outline  of  the 
plan  of  Government  which  will  prob- 
ably I"'  submitted  to  the  People  of 
the  Slate.-.  338.  Its  inefficacy,  338. 
Public  ignorance  and  reports  respect- 
ing it,  338,  339.    "  Unanii is  w  ish  to 

preserve  the  Union  of  the  States.  No 
proposition  was  made,  no  suggestion 
was  thrown  out,  in  favor  of  a  parti- 
tion of  the  empire  into  two  or  more 
<  lonfederacies."  '■'•  1 1.  Resolutions  in- 
troduced by  the  Virginia  delegation 
through  E.  Randolph,  III.  521.  IV. 
281,  286,  339,  3S0.  Plan  of  Govern- 
ment proposed  in  i  lharles  Pinckney, 
172.  201,  202,  203,  378,  379,  380.  Pro- 
found impression  among  the  members 
of  the  Convention  of  the  necessity  of 
binding  the  States  together  by  a 
strong  Constitution.  111.  244.  The 
term  "National,"  as  contradisting- 
uished from  'Federal."  was  not  meant 
to  express  more  than  that  the  powers 
to  be  vested  in  the  new  Government 
were  to  operate  as  a  National  Gov- 
ernment, directly  on   the  people,  and 

not  as  in  the  old  Confederal  mi  the 
Slates  only.  IV.  209.  Term  •'•  Nation- 
al.'* applied  to  the  contemplated  <  fov- 
ernment,  in  an  early  stage  of  the  Con- 
vention, in  contradistinction  not  to  a 
limited,  but  to  a  Federal,  Government, 

III.  .">2(i.  546.  Certain  that  not  more 
than  two  or  three  members  of  the 
Convention,  and  they  rather  tin  oret- 
icallv  than  practically,  were  in  favor 
of  an  unlimited  Government,  founded 
on  a  consolidation  of  the  States.  521. 
A  consideration  which  stimulated  the 
disposition  of  the  friends  of  the  Re- 
publican cause  to  give  to  the  new  sys- 
tem all  the  vigor  consistent  with 
republican  principles.  2  11.  245.  Real 
measure  of  the  powers  meant  to  be 
granted  by  it  to  Congress,  is  to  be 
sought  in  the  specifications,  in  ex- 
pounding which,  extreme  strictness 
and  unlimited  latitude  are  equally  to 
be  avoided.  IV.  74.  Exulting  but  un- 
founded  inferences  from  the  change 
of  the  word  ••  National  "  into  ••  United 
States."  LMi).  The  "threatening  con- 
test "  in  the  C.  turned,  uoi  ou  '.he  de- 


cox  —  cra] 


G  E  N'ERAL    IND  E  X  . 


603 


gr f  power  to  be  granted  to   the 

Federal  <  loverament,  but  on  the  rule 
by  which  the  Statea  should  be  repre- 
sented and  vote  in  the  Government, 
ill.  634.  [V.  77.  169,  429.  The  Treaty- 
making  power,  [11,515.  Rejection  of 
propositions  to  give  to  Congress  ih<' 
power  of  opening  canals,  IV.  [36.7! 
Why  rejected  ;  and  why  the  power 
mighl  have  been  properly  granted, 
1  i!i.  Major  Pierce's  Notes,  139.  Rejec- 
tion of  proposition  to  empower  <  !ong- 
ress  in  make  Corporations,  515,  Re- 
jection of  .i  proposition  to  discrimin- 
ate between  new  and  old  States.  III. 
153.  Sense  in  which  the  terms  "  mi- 
gration or  importation  of  persons" 
were  understood  in  the  Convention, 
105.  Erroneous  accounl  of  Dr.  Frank- 
lin's proposition  for  a  religious  service 
in  the  Convention,  IV.  169.  Memory 
as  in  the  disposition  of  the  Journal, 
II.  90.  III.  53.  The  printed  Journal 
of  the  Convention,  17  J.  IV.  122.  An 
error  in  it  pointed  out,  [II.  176.  Why 
infen  nces  from  votes,  in  the  Journals 
of  the  Convention,  being  unaccompa- 
nied by  the  reasons  for  them,  are 
unsafe,  [V.  310.  Plan  proposed  bj 
Hamilton,  I.  276.  [See  III.  [39,  [54, 
155,  643,  646.] 

(        i  ntion  Prisoners,  HI.  594. 

Convention  <;/'  1802  with  Spain,  II.  208. 

Conversations.  Some  allowance  in  cer- 
tain conversations,  must  be  made  for 
the  politeness  or  policy  of  respecting 
tin-  known  sentiments  of  the  party  to 
whieb  they  are  addressed  or  commu- 
nicated, I.  5  -7 

Cook,  Mi:..  IV.  222. 

Cooke,  Gen.,  [?  Cocke.]  III.  614. 

Coolidge,  Mrs.  E.,  Letter  to  : 

8  April,    1830,   IV.   OS.      [.See   III. 
540.] 

Cooper,  Thomas,  Letters  to: 
:.  January,      1823,  III.  2!)1 
22  March,         1824,    "     428 
2d  December,  1826,    "     ."ill 
A  Judge  in  Pennsylvania.     His  opin- 
ion on  the  effect  of  a.  sentence  of  a 
Foreign    Admiralty    Court.    II.   480. 
His  dispute  with  Judge  Johnson,  III. 
324,  325.     His  persecutions.  III.  360. 
His  Lectures  on    Political    Economy, 
M4  ;    on  Civil    Government,    and    on 
the    Constitution   of  IT.  S..  546,     His 
"Justinian,"  II.  557.  [SeeJJJ.126,291. 

Coppt  r  coinage,  I.  318. 

Copying  Press,  I.  318. 


Corbin,  Francis,  Letters  to  : 

2<i  November,   1820,  III.  193 
21  May.  1821,     '•     21i 

[See  1.  387.] 

CORBIN, .  I.  111.  2  1C.  217    222. 

■•  Com  Eaters,^  III.  216. 

Corn  Indian,  III.  82.  [See  'Crops," 
••  Prices."] 

Cornwallis,  Charles,  Marquis,  His 
military  operations  in  the  Southern 
States,  I.  :n    -50.     [See  5  is.] 

( !orre \  UK  Serb \.  Josei  a,  Minister 
from  Portugal  to  U.  S.  Conflict  be- 
tween his  two  charaters  of  Philanthro- 
pist ami  Plenipotentiary,  QI.44.  [See 
111.  187.] 

Cortes  of  Spain,  Their  fall.  III.  :)18. 

Cotton.  The  plant.  III.  86.  Domestic 
manufacture  of  ii.  III.  652.  [See  III. 
116,  129,  I7o.  206,  490.   IV.  1  15.  146.] 

Councils,  Executive,  Memorandum  of 
certain,  III.  403,  408. 

Council  of  Revision,  1 .  1'.)  I.  290. 

Council  of  State.  I.  7:;.  190,  iV>l. 

County  Courts  of  Virginia.  <>n  a  bad 
footing,  I.  Is".  Bill  for  reforming 
them,  209.  211.  215. 

Coxe,  Ti'Ai'ii.  Letters  to  : 
12  February,   1819,  III.  116 

20  March.  *  1820,  "  170 
1  November,    "       -     184 

21  February,  1S23,  "  301 
1  March,   '         "         "     304 

12  October,  "  "  :'>:;7 
:;  November,    "        "     ">l  1 

His  merits, services,  &c,  HI.  187,  188, 
1!I2.  196,  1!»!».  His  memoir  relating  to 
cotton,  III.  116.  His  view  of  the  U. 
S..  IV.  2  11.  257. 

Craig,    Mil,    I.    177.      [See   II.  394.] 

Oranb(  rries, 

Ck  wen,  William,  Chief  Judge  of  D.  C, 
Letteb  to : 

25  July,   [835,  IV.  382. 
His  Memoir  of  John  Adams,  IV.  279. 

CitAwioini, William  II..  LETTERS  to  ■ 
21  June,  1816,  III.      8 

29  June,  "      "       11 

21  September,     "      "  21 

22  September,     "      "  22 

23  September,     "      "  22 

30  September,  "  "  24 
3  October,  "  "  25 
I  February,    1817,  "  33 

2  1  April,    *  "      "  40 

24  October,  "      "  48 

25  February,  1820,   "  169 

13  April,  '  1824,  "  434 
1  October,  "      "  452 


604 


GENERAL     IN  I)  E  X 


[CEE  —  DAL 


Declines  the  War  Department  in  1813, 
and  afterwards  accepts  the  Mission  to 
France,  III.   134.     Secretarj   of  War. 
in    1815,    II.   611.    Secretary   of   the 
Treasury,  [11.29.     His  impaired  con- 
stitution, 31  I.  I3.">.     Surprise  at  an  in- 
ference stated  in  liis  letter  of  4th  Feb- 
ruary 1833,  to  Man  I  on  Dickersou,  IV. 
253,  254.*     [See  III.  24,  30,  37,  48.] 
Creek  agency,  III.  9. 
Creek  war,   [See  '"Indians."]    III.  391. 
Creoles,  Spanish  and  Portuguese  Cre- 
oles in  South  America,  III.  496. 
Cresson,  Elliott,  Letter  to: 

23  April.  1829,  IV.  38. 
Crevecusur,  M.  i>k.  I.  342. 
Creyon,  John  M.,  Letter  to  : 

17  October.  1809,  II.  457. 
Crimes  and  punishments.   Bill   in   the 
House  of  Delegates  of  Virginia  pro- 
portioning them,  I.  2(>0.  268,  272. 
Criticism.  A  publication  which  •'  smacks 
rather  of  the  bar  than  .smells  of  the 
lamp."  IV.  34. 
Crockett,  G.  F.  N.,  Letter  to  : 

6  November,  1823,  III.  342. 
Croghan,  Col.  George,  III.  40G,  407. 
414. 

Croker, ,  Vice  Admiralty  Judge  at 

Halifax.  (1814),  11.585. 
Crolics,  Clarkson,  Letter  to  : 

December,  1819,  III.  158. 
Cromwell,  Oliver,  His  vigor  in  for- 
eign transactions.  II.  268.     Edition  of 
the  Polyglot  Bible,  patronized  by  him 
and  his  Council.  III.  4  18. 
Crops.     I.  151,  159.  176.  242,  262,  334, 
33U,  337.  339.  389.  406,  562,  573,  .".77. 
582,  51)0,  594.      II.  80,  124,  131,  136, 
220.  517.     III.  5,  21,  38,  98,  181,  237, 
242.  266,  284.  331.  517. 
Crowninshield,   Benjamin  W., 
Letters  to  : 

15  December.  1814,     II.  595 
12  June.  1815,      "     003 

27  June.  1816,  HI.       9 

22  August,        1816,     ••         9 
Secretary  of  the  Navy.  II.  565.      Con- 
siderations leading  to  his  appointment. 
HI.  563.  564.     [See  Ml.  31.] 
Crozet,  Mr.,  Stale  Engineer  of  Virgin- 
ia. III.  625. 

Cuba,  II.  I  Hi.  188.  521.     III.  340. 
Cumberland,  Richard,  A  secret  emissa- 
ry of  G.  B.  at  the  Court  of  Spain.  IV. 
563. 
Cumberland  Road,  II!-  55.  56, 

•See  the  letter  in  Niles's  Register,  Aug.  24, 
l&jy,  xliv.  427. 


Cunningham  William.  His  correspond- 
ence with  J.  Adam..  1808—1812.  Out- 
rage and  probable  effects  of  the  pub 
lication,  III.  337,  350. 

Cunningham, ,  III  420, 

( uracoa,  [or  Curacao.]  II.  363. 

Currency,  III.  1  I.  17,  18,  26,  27.  1GU. 
IV.  81,  82,  160,  161. 

Cushing,  Caleb,  Letter  to  : 
2  February,  1836,  IV.  426. 

Cushing,  Gen.  Thomas  II..  III.  419,  420 

121. 
Cushing,    William,     appointed    Chief 

Justice  of  !.'.  S.  S.  C,  II.  80,  82. 
Cutting,  Dr.  Nathaniel,  Letter  to  : 
7  December,  1822,  III.  289. 

Cutts.  .  III.  296,  297. 

Curs.  Richard,  Letter  ro: 

11  .March.  1818,   ill.  60. 
Cutts,  Richard  I)..  Letters  to: 

[See  III.  480.] 
4  January,       1829,  IV.       1 

12  September,   1835,    "     383 
en  is.  Mrs.,  III.  452.  606,  662. 
Cypher.    I.  107,  121,  144.  153,  249,  337. 

467,  591.  II.  67,  79,  93,  103.  III. 
413. 


I>. 


Dade.  Lawrence  T..  and  others. 
Letter  to  : 
29  June,   1832,  IV.  223. 
D'Albon,   Claude  C.    1-'..  Count.,    His 
••  Discours  Politiques,  Historiques,  el 
Critiques,  sur  quelques  Gouvernments 
de  I'Europe."    I.   296,   297.   299.  300, 
3iil,  309. 

Dallas,  Alexander  J..  Letters  to: 
!i  April,  1816,  III.      1 

4  July,  ••        ••      12 

27  July,  ••         "       15 

2.">  August,  <;        "      17 

27  September,      "        ;'      23 
15  October,  "       "     29 

October,  "        '•      29 

11  November,       "        "      30 
His  Expose  of  tin'  causes  and  charac- 
ter ol    the  war  between   U.  S.   ami   G. 
I;.,  II.  (ion.    His   purpose   of   resign- 
ing  the  Department  <>!'  the  Treasury, 
HI.  1.  .").  20.  23,  2.V  26.     Resigns,  29, 
3n.    His  plan  respecting  the  currency, 
13.  1 1.  26.     His  death,  33.  His  claims 
to  the  admiring  ami  grateful  recolh  c- 
tions  of  his  country,  33.    [See  III.  22, 
26,  31.  36,  37.  19.] 
Pallas.  George  M.,  Letter  to: 
G  March,   1817,  III.  3G. 


DAL  —  DBS] 


GENERAL     I  X D E X 


G05 


His  intention  to  publish  the  Life  and 

writings  ol  his  lather.  III.  36. 
Dai  ton,  Triste  \m.  a  Senator  from  Mass- 
achusetts, I.  1 12. 

Dana,  Francis,  a  Delegate  from  Massa- 
chusetts to  the  Federal  Convention,  I. 

282      [See  [.  368,  373.] 
Dandridge,  Bartholomew,  His  death, 

I.  152. 
"Danger  not  over.  The."  A  publication  by 

Pendleton  in  L801,  IV.  4,5,  9,  11.  1-'. 

36,  -is. 

Daniel,  W  llker,  I.  108. 
Daschkoff,  A.NDRE,  Minister  from  Rus- 

to  U.  S,  II.  446,  149. 
D  1 \  !:•:.   Willi  \m    R.,    Governor  of  N. 

Carolina,    II    166.    <  lommissioner  to 

France,  108. 
Davis.  John  A.  G.,  Professor.  Ac. 
Letter  ro  :   1832,  [1833],  IV.  232. 

His  lectures  on  the  Constitutionality 

of  protective  duties,  IV.  232 
Davis.  WaRREN,  R.,  IV.  411.  ft. 
Daw.  Sib  Hi  mphrey,  His  experiments 

concerning  the  plaster  of  gypsum,  III. 

87. 

Dawes,  Thomas,  III.  639. 
Dawson,  .  I.  358,  387,  452.     II.  26, 

59.  126,  140,  153,  17  1.  176. 
Dayton.  Jonathan,  II.  02. 

Dayton,  Gen. ,  IV.  155. 

Deane,    Silas,      A    Commissioner    to 

France.      His  obliquity.  I.  57.      His 

letters.  75,  90,  158, 
Dearborn,  Gen.  Henrt,  Letters  to  : 
9  August,     1812,  II.  538 

7  October,       ••       "    545 

8  August,      1813,  "    569 
1  March,        1815,  "   598 

Secretary  of  War,  1801  —  1809.  Un- 
successful nomination  of  him  to  the 
same  office  in  1815,  II.  598.  599. 
Major  General  in  1812.  Considera- 
tions leading  to  his  appointment,  ill. 
562.  [See  H.  99,  101,  102,543,544,  549, 
558.  569,  570.     III.  388,  421,  492.] 

Debt.  [See  "  Poblic  Debt,"]  Deferred 
debt,  I.  541.  General  indebtment, 
and  its  causes.  IV.  1  16. 

Decator,  Commodore  Stephen',  IT.  (ill 
III.  16. 

"  Declaration  of  Independence."  At- 
tempt, to  pervert  the  historical  cir- 
cumstances relating  to  the  draught  of 
it.  ID.  282.  Moved  in  Congress  in 
obedience  to  positive  instructions  of 
Virginia,  passed  unanimously  in  her 
Convention.  5  May  177(5.  by  R.  II. 
Lee.  next  in   order  in  the  Delegation 


to  Peyton  Randolph  who  had  died, 
382,337.  Apocryphal  tradition,  336. 
independence  an  object  nol  avowed 
nor  understood  to  be  entertained  at 
the  beginning  of  the  Revolution,  or 
al  the  assembling  of  the  firsl  < long- 
ress.  by  the  leaders  of  thai  daj .  609. 

What  was  the  real  nbjecl  Ol  every 
class  of  People,  originally  and  till 
events  had  prepared  the  public  mind 
for  Independence,  609.  Proposed  Bi- 
ographical <  lommemoration  of  it,  610. 
Selected  as  one  of  four  paintings  on 
the  Revolutionary  subjects,  provided 
for  by  Congress,  IV.  376.  [See  III. 
181,482.     IV.  188,  403.] 

•  Declaration  of  war,"  by  U.  S.  against 
G.  B.  in  1812.  [See  "War."]  Pre- 
sumption that  it  would,  at  least,  have 
been  suspended,  had  the  ( ►rders  in 
Council  been  repealed  a  few  weeks 
sooner  than  they  were,  III.  445,  554, 
555.  The  more  immediate  impulse  to 
it,  554.  IV.  360.  Folly  and  false- 
hood of  the  charge  that  it  was  made 
in  subserviency  to  the  view-  of  Napo- 
leon, III.  555.  Examination  of  the 
charge  that  it  was  made  without  du« 
preparation,  556,  557.  Tardiness  of 
the  Legislative  provisions,  556. 

Dedham,  IV.  38. 

Deer  Island,  II.  180. 

Definition.  The  definition  of  the  terms 
used  in  argument  is  the  only  effective 
precaution  against  fruitless  and  end- 
less discussion,  III.  436. 

De  La  Mo  ii  a.  Dr.,  Letter  to: 
August,  1820,  III.  178. 

Delaplaine, .  His  ••  Repository  of 

the  Lives  and  Portraits  of  Distinguish- 
ed American  Characters,"  III.  126.  IV. 
115. 

Delaware.    I.  197.  247,  275.    II.  83. 

III.  308.  IV.  92,  149,  255.  Elections, 
II.  26,  .';.">.  61.  Not  impossible  that 
she  may  hereafter  consent  to  an  in- 
corporation with  her  neighbour,  III. 
:;:;:;. 

Democratic  Societies,  II.  11.  21.  22. 

J>' mocrats,  III.  .".17. 

Denmark,  I.  391.    U.  520.    HL  650. 

Deposite  at  New  Orleans.  Suspension 
and  restoration  of  it,  II.  181,  182.  Ob- 
vious reason  for  the  right  of  deposite, 

IV.  446. 

Deposite  of  the  Fublie  moneys,  [V.  355. 

Desertions  of  seamen  from  merchant- 
men and  from  ships  of  war.  contra- 
distinguished, II.  408,  409,  410. 


00(1 


G  E  X  E  R  A  L    I  N  D  E  X  . 


[DIES 


/'  ,.  Unq  Seamen.  II.  467, 

Dbstoi  cues,  Chevalier,  His  expedition 
into  <  'hesapeake  Bay,  I.  48.  Thanks 
of  Congress  for  his  gallantry  and 
good  conduct,  49. 

Detroit.  II.  580.  III.  396,  416.  417.  492, 
561. 

Detroit.  Traders,  &c.  Their  criminal 
project  of  obtaining  the  peninsula 
formed  bv  Lakes  Huron  &  Michigan, 
II.  70. 

Dew,  Thomas  1!..  Letter  to  : 
2b  February,  is:;:;.  IV.  274. 
His    pamphlets  on   the   "  Restrictive 
question,"  and  on  the  "Slave  quest- 
ion."' 27  I. 

Dextku,  Samuel.  II.  19,  29,  32,  34. 

Dey  iii-  Algiers,  Letter  to  the  : 
August,  1816.  III.  15. 

Diary  of  "  our  friend  in  N.  Carolina." 
II.  ill. 

Dickinson-,  John,  I.  2.  III.  133.  203, 
204. 

Digrv,  Admiral  Robert,  I.  51. 

" Dir/est  of  the  City  Code  and  business." 
11.459. 

Diplomatic  Missions.  III.  635. 

"  Diplomatique  Francoise,"  III.  435, 
45a. 

Dismemberment.   [See  "Virginta."] 

Distinctions,  natural  and  artificial,  in 
society. 

"  Distress  for  Rent"  Treatise  on.  IV. 
179. 

District  of  Columbia.  [See  "  Wash- 
ington, Cittop,"]  A  University  with- 
in it  is  Constitutional,  III.  631.  In- 
quiry as  to  military  events  in  D.  C, 
II.  .Vli  I.  592.     [See  ill.  220.  031.] 

District  Courts  m  Va..  I.  281.  A  Leg- 
islative Kill  concerning  them,  clogged 
wiih  an  objectionable  clause.  264, 
265.  -J(iii.  27  1.  37S. 

Disunion.  [See  ••  Georgia.*'  "Massa- 
chusetts."' ••  Xn.i.incA no\.'"  ••  Secess- 
ion," "South  Carolina,"  "Union," 
Ac.  &c]  Disbelief  that,  there  is  so 
much  depravity  or  stupidity  in  the 
Eastern  Stales,  as  to  countenance  the 
reports  that,  they  will  separate  from 
their  brethren,  rather  than  submit 
longer  to  the  suspension  of  their  com- 
merce, II.  1.7.  A  juuto  contradistin- 
guished from  the  body  of  an  intelli- 
gent People,  r_'7.  1-28.  Revolt  and  sep- 
aration improbable,  without  the  profli- 
gate experiment  of  foreign  co-oper- 
alien.  . ",;)  |.  ■•Tempestuous  hostilities 
which  await  a  dissolution  of"  the  Uni- 


on, III.  175.  Resolutions  passed  by 
both  Georgia  ami  South  Carolina, 
which  abroad  may  be  regarded  as 
striking  at.  the  Union  it-. 'It ;  bm  are 
ebullitions  of  the  moment,  &c  819. 
Spirit  of  Disunion  in  South  Carolina, 
635.  Suggestion  to  those  who  would 
rush  into  it  as  an  asylum  from  op- 
pressive measures  of  the  General 
Government,  636.  A  lesson  from  the 
period  anterior  to  the  adoption  of  the 
presenl    Constitution.   636,     Obvious 

ami  awful  consequences    to    the  Slates 

of  their  "  entire  separation  into  inde- 
pendent sovereignties,"  646.  Virginia 
••  frowns  on  every  symptom  "I  vio- 
lence ami   disunion,"  662.    Surprise 

at  the  rapid  growth  and  at  the  birth- 
place of  the  doctrine  that  would  con- 
vert the  Federal  Government  into  a 
mere  league,  which  would  quickly 
throw  the  States  back  into  a  chaos, 
out  of  which,  not  order  a  second  time, 
but  lasting  disorders  of  the  worst 
kind,  could  not  fail  to  grow,  IV.  (J. 
If  a  State  placed  in  the  midsl  of  .-tales 
attached  to  the  Union  and  it<  Govern- 
ment, and  regarding  both  as  essential 
to  their  well  being,  were  to  renounce 
its  Federal  obligations,  and  erect  it- 
self into  an  independent  and  alien 
nation,  the  innovation  would  lie  fatal 
to  the  Federal  Government,  to  the 
Union,  to  the  hopes  of  liberty  and 
humanity  :  and  presents  a  catastrophe 
at  which  all  oughl  to  shudder.  6  !.  65. 
Evils  of  disunion.  192,193,218,273, 
298,  37:;.  383,  391.  In  disastrous 
consequences  obvious  to  all.  216.  A 
successful  resistence  to  the  laws  as 
now  attempted  (in  1833)  if  not  imme- 
diately mortal  to  the  Union,  would 
be.  at  least,  a  mortal  wound  to  it.  472. 
The  recession  of  S.  Carolina  from  her 
position  would  be  on  the  avowed 
grounds  of  her  respect  for  (he  inter- 
position of  Virginia,  and  a  reliance  that 
Va.  is  to  make  common  cause  through- 
out. '.'73.  In  that  event,  ami  a  .  ontin- 
uance  of  the  Tariff  laws,  the  pros- 
pect before  us  would  be  a  rupture  of 
the  Union  :  a  Southern  Confederacy  : 
mutual  enmity  with  the  Northern  : 
the  most  dreadful  animosities  and 
border  wars,  springing  from  the  case 
ol  slaves  :  rival  alliances  abroad  : 
Standing  armies  at  home,  to  lie  sup- 
ported by  Internal  taxes  :  and  Feder- 
al  Governments  with    powers  of   a 


]>  i)  I)  —  I)  W  I] 


G  BN  ER  AL    INDEX 


G07 


more  consolidating  and  monarchical 
tendency  ,tban  the  greatest  jealousy  has 
charged  on  the  existing  system,273.  Lin- 
ing efforts  i"  alarm  theSouth  by  im- 
putations againsl  the  North  of  uncon- 
stitutional designs  on  the  subject  of 
the  Slaves,  301.  Disbelief  in  them. 
Reasons  for  it,  301.  Madness  in  the 
Smth  in  look  for  greater  safety  on 
this  Bubject  ia  Disunion,  301.  This 
would  be  worse  than  jumping  out  of 
the  frying  pan  into  the  fire:  It  would 
be  jumping  into  the  fire  for  fear  of 
the  frying  pan,  301.  Sympathies  aris- 
ing from  known  causes,  and  the  incul- 
cated impression  of  a  permanent  in- 
compatibility of  interests  between 
the  South  and  the  North,  may  put  it 
in  the  power  of  popular  leaders  aspi- 
ring to  the  highest  stations,  and  de- 
spairing of  success  on  the  Federal 
theatre,  to  unite  the  South  on  some 
critical  occas  ion,  in  a  course  that  will 
end  in  creating  a  new  theatre  of  great, 
though  inferior,  extent.  In  pursuing 
lhi>  course,  the  Bret  and  most  obvious 
step  is  nullification  ;  the  next  secess- 
ion :  and  the  last,  a  farewell  separa- 
tion, 358.  <  Countervailing  calculations. 
358,  332.  Km.  in  the  meantime,  local 
prejudices  and  ambitious  leaders  may 
succeed  in  finding  or  creating  occasi- 
on for  the  nullifying  experiment  of 
breaking  a  more  beautiful  China  vase 
lhan  tie  British  empire  ever  was.  into 
parts  which  a  miracle  only  could  re- 
unite, 358. 

Doddridge,  Philip,  Letter  to  : 
6  June.  1832,  IV.  221. 
His  Speech  on  Congressional  privi- 
lege, IV.  220,  221.  His  controversy 
with  Cook :  and  misconstruction  of 
an  amendment  proposed  by  Madison 
in  the  Virginia  Convention  of  1829, 
authorizing  the  Legislature,  by  a  vote 
of  two  thirds,  to  re-apportion  the 
Representation  as  inequalities  might 
from  lime  to  time  require.  222 

Doherty,  Joseph,  II.  473. 

Dohrman, ,  II.  79,  89,  95. 

Dominica.  III.  462. 

Donald,  Mr.,  I.  405. 

Doradour,  M..  I.  195,  202. 

Dorman, .  I. :;:;:;.  :;:;t.  310.  408. 

Drake,  Dr.  Daniel,  Letter  to  : 
12  January  183.').  IV.  372. 
His  Discourse  on  the  "  History,  char- 
acter,  ami   prospects  of   the  West."* 
IV.  372. 


Drayton,  John,  Letter  to  : 
23  September  1821,  111.  231. 
His  Memoirs  of  the  American  Revo- 

luiion.  III.  231. 

Drayton,  Col.  William,  in.  414. 
Vrougltis.     I.  339.  oC2.  592,  594.    II. 

i:;.  ' 

I.M.'l  MMOXD,  — — ,  IT.  591. 

Hi  am;.  James,  I.  405.     IV.  461. 

:  ,  William,  His  want  id' candor,  as 
well  as  of  temperance.  IT.  507.  A 
sincere  friend  of  liberty,  and  a  slave 
of  his  passions,  507,  508.  Seems  to 
lie  incorrigible,  512. 

I»i  dley, .  I.  76. 

Dcer,  William  A..  Letter  to: 
September,  L833,  IV.  308 
5  June,  1835,    "     378 

Outline-  of  his  work  on  the  Constitu- 
tional Jurisprudence  of  the  1*.  S..  IV. 
308. 

Di  er.  [  '  William  ]  Author  of  several 
pieces  auxiliary  to  the  numbers  of 
the  •■  Federalist."  IV.  309.  [See  IV. 
308.] 

i«  the  Army.  III.  418. 

Dclton,  Cart..  H.  210. 

Dumas,  ■ .  I.  338. 

hi  mont,  John,  His  "Corps  Pniverselle 
Diplomatique  du  droits  des  gens."  II. 
265,  266,  267,  269,  286. 

Di  mourtez,  Gen.  Charles  F.,  His  apos- 
tasy,  I.  580,  583.  Burnt  in  effigy  at 
Charleston  S.  C.  II.  9. 

Dcnglison,  Dr.  Robeey.  III.  525.  IV. 
303. 

Dn  Plantain,  Mr..  II.  217. 

Dunbar,  Robert.  II.  16,  139. 

Dunlap,  — — .  I.  570.  His  newspaper, 
II.  47.  Published  Debates  in  Cong- 
ress,  IV.  30.3. 

Ddplessis,  Mr..  III.  20. 

Dupont  de  Nemours,  Peter  S.,  I.  422. 
II.  159,  457. 

Dutch.  The.  Their  former  naval  ascen- 
dency, III.  236,  239.  Their  humilia- 
ation  in  the  case  of  a  violation  of 
their  local  Sovereignty,  3. 

Duties.  1.466,469,470,471,480,  187, 
488,  o.")3.  Abolishment  of  discrimin- 
ations in  favor  of  Nations  in  Treaty, 
•172.  174.  480,  481,  485.  489. 

Duval,  Mr..  II.  164. 

Duvall,  Gariuee,  Associate  Justice 
of  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.,  III. 
487. 

Dwight,  Theorore,  His  "  History 
of  the  Hartford  Convention,"  IV. 
340. 


608 


G  E  X  EEAL    IN  I)  E  X  . 


[EAI!  —  E  B  S 


E. 
Eaki.y.  Peter,  Go^  ernor  of  Georgia, 

LET!  GR  in  : 
is  December,  LSI  I.  II.  597. 

Earthqual  es,  1 1.  526. 

East  Indies,  Trade  with  the,  II.  201. 

••  Eastern  Junto."  [ts  co-operation 
with  the  British  cabinet.  II.  530. 

Ecclesiastical  Journal,   I.  L59. 

Eccleston,  Major,  IV.  156. 

Eccleston,  Plantagenet,  Letter  to  : 
1810,  II.  463. 

Economics,   III.  191. 

Economy.    [See  "  Manners."] 

Edinburgh  Bt  m  id.  III.  264. 

Education.  I.  260,  261,  268,  272.  273. 
III.  184,  216,  217.  232,  276  —  280,294, 
316,  332,  196.  Advantages  of  learn- 
ed institutions  to  a  free  People,  111. 
277,  27S.  Duty  of  the  American  Peo- 
ple to  foster  science,  &c,  279.  IV.  38. 
General  ardor  and  emulation  in  estab- 
lishing schools  and  seminaries  for  the 
diffusion  of  knowledge;  III.  332.  Ex- 
amples in  the  Pastern  States.  280. 
Plan  in  Maryland  for  Public  instruc- 
tion of  youth,  295,  296,  522.  Its  con- 
nexion with  Free  Government,  596, 
616.  IV.  31,38.  Public  education. 
Bill  for  the  "diffusion  of  knowledge  " 
in  the  code  prepared  by  Jefferson, 
Wythe,  and  Pendleton,  between  the 
years  1776,  and  1771),  I V.  108.  Prim- 
ary schools.  Examples  in  New  Eng- 
land, N.  York.  Pennsylvania  and  Ma- 
ryland, IV.  108,  109. 

Edwards,  Pierrepont,  Letter  to  : 
4  August,  1806,  II.  22."). 

EDWARDS,  Dr. ,  His  answer  to  Ad- 
dison's attack  on  Monroe.  II.  1  16. 

Egypt,  III.(i7.  81,  82. 

Elections.    [See  the  Several  States.] 

Annual,  triennial,  septennial,  consid- 
ed  in  reference  to  the  different  depart- 
ments of  power.  I.  182.  Chauges  in 
late  elections  in  Virginia,  232,  237, 
262.  Such  a  process  of  elections  as 
will  mosl  certainly  extract  from  the 
mass  of  the  Society  its  purest  and 
noblest  characters,  a  desideratum, 
:52s.  In  New  England  and  Pennsyl- 
vania. II.  25.  [Sec  II.  34,  60,  PH.  L08, 
L75,  L81,  is:;.  225,  443,  17  1.  189.  549, 
550,  582.     III.   I.] 

Elements.  Number  of  them  known, 
not  vet  decomposable,  &c,  III.  69,  70. 
[See  III.  206,  207.  257.] 

Ellicott,  Andrew.  III.  388,  389. 


Elliot,  Jonathan.  Letters  to  : 
25  November,    1826,    III.  554 
I  I  February,      L857,     "    552 
November,       "        ••     598 
His  ••  Debates  of  the  State  <  lonven- 
tions,"  &c,   III.  552,  598.     Flaws  in 
the    Reports  of   some   of   Mad 
lie    598. 

Ellsworth,  Oliver.  A  Senator  from 
( Connecticut,  I.  430,  1 12.  i  Commis- 
sioner to  France  II.  168.  Prepar- 
ed the  Judicial  Act  of  L789,  [V.  220, 
221.  222.  428.  His  talents,  &C,  and 
public  services,  427,428.  [See  li.  in  i. 
IV.    111.] 

Elmer,  Dr.  Jonathan,  A  Senator  from 
New  Jersey,  I.  439. 

Emancipation,      [See    ••  Mani  his 
•■  Slavery."] 

Embargo,  IT.  5,  8,  11,  15,  16,  17.  80,94, 
437,  170.  473,  531,  532,  .V.;:;.  III.  III. 
[V.  359,  199,  500. 

Emigrants,  II.  576.  Graduation  of 
their  several   classes,  III.  120 

Emigration,  IV.  155 — 458. 

Emmtos,  Ubbo,  His  ••  Veins  Gracia  il 
lustrata,"  1.  248,  293,  294,  297. 

ror  of  Germany,  I.  310,  313,  314. 

Ekgelbreght,  Jacob,  Letters  to  : 
20  October,  1825,  III.  502 
10  June,        1S27,    "      585 

England.  [See  "  Great  Britain."]  I. 
393.  H.  61,  440,  441.  III.  210.211, 
309.  Independent  character  of  the 
Judges,  and  uniformity  of  their  decis- 
ions, Q.  387.  Supposed  exception  as 
to  Admiralty  or  Prize  Courts,  389. 
Instance  of  the  integrity  of  her  Courts 
of  Justice,  297,  553,  554.  Fraud  and 
folly  in  her  late  conduct.  450.  Whig 
party  in  England,  IV.  1  12.  1  13. 

English  langi  lge.  Importance  of 
pro\  iding  for  its  purity,  stability  and 
uniformity.  None  seems  destined  for 
a  greater  and  freer  portion  of  the  hu- 
man family.  III.  172. 

"Englishm  n's  turn"  I.  i'7. 

Entails,  HI.  177. 

Episcopal  clergy  in  Virginia,  Their  pre- 
lect, I.  88.  Act  incorporating  the  E 
'church.  L29,  L60.  [See  I.  111.  17;.. 
274.]  Petition  for  Repeal  of  the  law, 
258.  Indolence  of  most,  and  irregular 
lives  of  many,  of  them.  III.  122—123. 

Efpes.Col.  I."  122. 

Fitks.  Mil.  III.  544,  632.  633. 

Eppington, .  II.  459. 

Erie  Canal,  III.  524.    See  ["Canais."] 

Frskim;,  David  M.,  Minister  from  G.  B. 


L  K  Y  E  X  E  ] 


G  l:  N  E  11  A  L     INDEX 


GOO 


to  U.S..  II.  406,  137,  II.".,  450,  453, 
454,  460,  105,  166,  191,  499,  :.()7.  571. 
His  ••  arrangement  "  with  the  Govern- 
menl  of  U.S.,  and  "extraordinary  ex- 
planation," III.  Instructions  to  him, 
as  published  by  Canning,  450.  Bis 
tickJsh  situation  with  his  <  tovernment, 
and  strong  case  against  Canning, 
452. 

Eevdcg,  George  W.,  Letter  to: 

1  November,  1805,  II.  214. 
Minister  to   Spain.     His  "  faux   pas," 
II.   137,   138.     His  case  <>r   commiss- 
ions, .".1 1.    [See  II.  202.    III.  24.] 

Erwin,  -     .11.  162,  163,  1(14. 

Escheat,!.  219. 

EsguimauxAll.  66,  101. 

'■  Essex-,"  The.  II.  493;  512. 
■  (  ubini  t.  The,  II.  Ill 

Etiquettt  Questions  of  ,  I.  141.  II.  189, 
195  —  199.  III.  L5.  Rule  of  "  pele 
mele."  II.  196,  197. 

Edrope.  [See  Particular  European  Na- 
tions.] Shifting  demeanour  of  the 
great  nations  of  Europe  toward  1'.  S  . 
II.  215.  Accounts  from,  I.  135.  II. 
452,  453,  159.  IV.  347.  Extent  of 
sundry  European  States.  I,  398. 

Eustace,  Rev.  John  ('.,  His  Classical 
tour  through  Italy,  III.  102,  17<J. 

Ecstis,  W'mi. iam.  Letters  to  : 

1  December,  1812,  II.  551 
12  November,  1813,  "  576 
15  December,  1814,  "  594 
12  May.  1816,  III.       2 

March,         1817,    "      39 

6  July,  1819,    ,:     139 

22  May,  1823,    "     317 

14  June,  "        "     321 

His  qualifications,  &c,  111.5(14.  Sec- 
retary  of  War.  II.  453.  Resigns,  551. 
Minister  (..  the  Netherlands,  594.  Sug- 
gestion to  liim  to  write  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  American  history,  HI.  110.  1  IS. 
199.  IV.  32. 
Evans.  Robert  J.,  Letter  to  : 

15  June.  1819,  HI.  133. 
Evans.  Thomas,  Letter  to  : 

May.   ISO!),   11.  441. 
Eve.  George,  Letter  to  ; 

2  January,  1789,  I.  446. 
Everett,  Alexader  H..  His  book  on 

Europe,  HI.  261,  297,  305,  309.  Min- 
ister to  Spain.  His  work  on  America, 
583,  His  error  in  supposing  that 
Washington  "  wavered  for  a  moment 
in  making  up  his  mind  upon  the  Con- 
stitution."   584.      His    strictures    on 


spam, 


>84. 


Everett,  Edward,  Letters  to  : 

9  March.  1822,  III.  261 

is  February,  1823,  "  207 

ill  March,  *        "  "  305 

20  November,     "  "  348 

22  April,  1825,  "  4S7 

19  July,              "  "  493 

3  June,  1827,  "  5s:; 

I  June.  ls.s.  ••  634 

8  April.  1830,  IV.  G9 

April.               "  "  72 

5  August,            "  "  94 

Anuust,              "  '•  '.15 

'20  August,  "      "    lot; 

10  September,     "       "     109 

7  October,  "        "      115 

30  May,  1832,    "     220 

22  August,  1833,  "  307 
22  October,  1834,  "  371 
His  oration  at  Concord,  Mass.,  III. 
493.  His  speech  which  led  him  into 
th<'  subject  i.r  the  foreign  intercourse 
ill'  V .  S..  634.  His  address  on  the  cen- 
tennial anniversary  of  the  arrival  of 
Gov.  Winthrop  at  Charlestown,  and 
speech  mi  the  Indian  subject,  IV.  94. 
His  Fourth  of  July  Address  at  Wor- 
cester. 307.  His  Eulogy  ou  La  Fay- 
ette. 371.     [See  IV.   111'.  «.] 

"Examination  <;/'  the  British  doctrine 
which  subjects  /"  capture  a  neutral 
trade  not  open  in  time  of  peace,  II. 
226  —  291.  299,  300.  III.  581.  IV. 
565. 

'■Exchange.  The."  III.  2G5. 

Excise  system,  IV.  485.  [See  I.  4G9, 
527.  528,  520,  52!),  5G1,  571,  II.  14, 
16,  76. 

Executive  Bill  in  the  Legislature  of  Va. 
subjecting  lands  to  debts,  I.  2G8. 

Executive  Council  of  Pa.,  "  a  grave  of 
useful  talent."  I.  73. 

Executive  Councils.  Memoranda  of,  III. 
403,  408. 

Executive  Department.  [See  "Consti- 
tution of  U.  S.,"  "  Great  Britain," 
••  Helvidius."]  Proposition  of  G. 
Mason,  in  the  Federal  Convention, 
seconded  by  Dr.  Franklin,  for  making 
a  Council  of  six  members  a  part  of 
the  Executive  branch  of  the  Govern- 
ment. HI.  17G.  Three  Departments, 
auxiliary  lo  the  President,  establish- 
ed, II.  471.  472,  483.  Difficulty  in 
the  arrangement  of  the  subordinate 
Departments.  Unity  in  each  resolved 
on,  and  an  amenability  to  the  Presi- 
dent alone  and  to  the  Senate  by  way 
of  impeachment,  474.     Reasons  for  a 


VOL.    IV. 


010 


G  E  N ERAL     1  X  D  E  X 


f    K  X  P  —  FAT 


power  of  removal  in   the  Presidenl 

alone  I.  17 1.  475,  476,  177.  17s.  18  I. 
The  Executive  will  be  the  weak 
brancb  of  the  Government,  175.  Sup- 
posed  bj  Constitution  I'.  S.  to  be  the 

branch.  &c,  mosl    pr &C,  to  War.  I 

II.  131.  Usurpation  of  a  Legislative 
power,  L32.  Objections  to  the  attend- 
ance of  the  Heads  of  Departments  as 
witnesses  to  give  irrelative  testimony, 
225.  Changes  in  the  Executive  De- 
partments in  1812,557.  Constitution- 
al principles  on  which  it  rests,  602. 
Duty  of  the  Executive  in  contingent 
cases,  in.  8.  lis  proclamations  of 
Fasts  and  Festivals.  27-1.  275.  "  Con- 
trolled by  the  legal  state  of  things," 
391.  A  case  in  which  an  injury  with- 
out reparation  would  be  a  cause  of 
war,  but  in  which  the  Executive 
should  await  the  decision  of  Congress, 
301.  Relation  of  the  Secretary  to 
the  Accountant  of  the  War  Depart- 
ment, 409.  Relations  of  the  Heads 
of  Departments  to  the  President  of  U. 
S.,  417.  418.  The  only  case  in  which 
the  Executive  can  enter  on  a  war  un- 
declared by  Congress,  is  when  a  state 
of  war  has  "  been  actually  "  produced 
by  the  conduct  of  another  Power  : 
and  then  it  ought  to  be  made  known 
as  -"'in  as  possible  to  the  Department 
charged  with  the  War  power,  600. 
Exercise  of  the  Executive  power  in 
certain  cases,  without  the  intervention 
of  the  Judiciary,  IV.  57. 

Expat rhilhm.  IV.  20,  64,  270. 

Experiment  for  Navigation  and  Com- 
mereial  jmtposes,  I.  519. 

Exports.  Why  the  Constitution  of  U. 
S.  prohibits  Congress  from  laying  a 
tax  or  duty  on  Exports,  III.  640. 

Expunging  Resolutions,  for  expunging 
from  the  Journal  of  the  Senate  of  U. 
S.  its  Resolution  of  28  March  1834, 
which  declares  that  President  Jack- 
son "  in  the  hue  Executive  proceed- 
ings in  relation  to  the  public  Revenue, 
has  assumed  upon  himself  authority 
and  power  nol  conferred  by  the  Con- 
stitution and  laws,  but  in  derogation 
of  both."  otfered  June  1834,  and  passed 
16  January,  1837,  IV.,  432,  433. 

F. 

Fmt!o\s.  [See  "Parties."]  They 
exisl  in  all  civilized  societies. 

Fallow  and  roe  deer  nol  native  quadru- 
peds of  America.  1.  251 


Fanaticism  and  hypocrisy,  HI.  98. 

Farewell  Address.  Draft  following 
Washington's  outline,  1.  565  —  567. 
568.     [See  III.  183.] 

Farm.    [See  "Agkn  i  lti  re,"  "Rome/7] 

Bur  tier's  Papers,  The,  111.  600. 

Faronde,  lucubrations  of,  II.  54'.). 

Fashion.  Effecl  of  its  caprices  on 
those  who  supply  the  wants  oi  fancy, 
[11.576.  Distress  to  buckle  makers 
iu  G.  B.  and  l".  S.,  caused  i>.\  the  sub- 
stitution of  shoe  strings  for  shoe  buck- 
les, 576.     IV.  476     178. 

Fasts  and  Festivals,  Executive  procla- 
mations of,  HI.  27  I.  275. 

Facchet, .  Minister  from  France, 

II.  :;.  His  conciliatory  conduct.  6,  8. 
Informally  intimates  the  distaste  to 
(7.  Morris.  11,  His  intercepted  letter. 
65. 

Faolkneb,  Charles  J.,  Letter  to  : 
26  July,   1832.  IV.  567. 

Fayette,  M.  P.  J.  R.  Y.  G.  M..  Mar- 
quis de  La.  Letters  to  : 

20  March.  1785,     I.   136 

21  February,     1806,    II.  217 
25  November,   1820,  III.  189 

1821.   ••     237 

21  August.         1824,   ••     450 
November,    L826,   "     538 

20  February,     1828,   "     617 

15  June.  1829,  IV . 

1  February.     1830,    ••       58 

12  December.  "  ••  ]  1  ] 
3  August.  1831,  "  192 
Commands  in  Virginia,  I.  16.  Inter- 
view with  him.  Manifestations  of  re- 
spect for  him.  His  intended  tour. 
Considerations  suggested  to  him  re- 
specting the  navigation  of  the  Missis- 
sippi, and  the  interest  of  France  in 
that  question,  99,  100,  101.  Makes  a 
B] ch  to  the  Indian-  at  Fori  Schuyl- 
er, 104,  105,  L06.  His  character,  106, 
175.  Bust  voted  by  II.  of  I  >el 
of  Virginia.  His  tour.  113.  Extract 
of  a  letter  from  him.  149.  Naturaliz- 
ed by  Virginia,  21  I.  Rumors  concern- 
ing him.  120.  429.  Pill  granting  land 
to  him  for  military  services.  |[.  1 7 ;j , 
181,  L82.  His  wi-'h  tor  a  loan,  217. 
Hi-  "opinion  on  the  Election  pro- 
ject," HI.  L89.  His  opinion  occasi- 
oned by  the  Budget  237.  Hi-  arrival 
in  U.  S.,  III.  450,  l.'l.  Reception, 
171.  172.  492.  His  departure,  498. 
Memoir  of  him.  486,  488.  Hi-  ••  ^m- 
erous  hint,"  respecting  the  affairs  of 
Jefferson's  estate.  539,  540.     Mi-print 


PEA  —  JIT] 


(;  i:  n  e  B  a  l   i  n  n  i:  x  . 


Gil 


in  a  publication  of  hia  remarks  <>n  the 
•nli  of  .inly.  619.  His  Bpeech  on  1 1 1 « - 
tomb  ol  Manuel,  619.  His  answer  to 
Clay,  620.  An  incident  in  bis  ca- 
reer. IV.  345,  359.  Hi-  death  20 
.May  1834,  346.  lis  probable  influ- 
ence on  parties,  346,  347.  [See  I.  102, 
107.  160,  lti2.  494.      11.   182,  161,  542, 

III.  134,  543,  603.  IV.  60,  371, 
:;7ti.] 

Featherstonhaugh,  (',.  W.,  Letters  to  : 

June.  1820,  III.   177 

23  December,     "      "      197 

March,  L821,  "      206 

.".  April,  ••      ••     2o7 

11  March,  1826,  "      519 

13  March.  1828,    -       til'.". 

8  December,  1833,  IV.   325 

"  Of  Jay's  Treaty.  II.  17. 

Federal  Convention.  [See"CoNYEN- 
noN,  &c,  at  Philadelphia,"] 

Federal  Government.  [See  ••  Confed- 
eracy."] Competition  lor  the  seat  of 
it.  temporary  ami  permanent,  I.  7:;. 
291,407,408—411,413,  III.  415,  41(1. 
117.  418,  419,  428,  430,  I'M.  492.  493, 
494,  496,  496,  515,  519,520,521.  Sen- 
ate bill  fixing  the  permanent  seat  on 
the  Potomac,  and  ill"  temporary  at 
Philadelphia,  521,  522.  Fortuitous 
coincidence  of  circumstances  leading 
to  the  choice  of  the  Potomac,  521, 
522.  [See  II.  111.]  The  Federal  sys- 
tem of  Government  essential  to  the 
complete  success  of  republicanism  in 
any  form,  IV.  ti7.  Greater  danger  of 
encroachments  on  than  by  the  Federal 
Government.  I.  349,  409. 

federal  powers.  Expediency  of  a  prop- 
er distribution  of  them.  1.  286. 

Federal  principle,  The,  IV.  141.  142. 
327,  1-21. 

Federal    Republic,    The.      "  The    best 
guardian,  as  we  believe,  of  the  lib- 
erty, the  Bafety,  and  the  happiness  oi 
man."     III.  222. 

Federal  party.  Its  new  fangled  policy, 
II.  442.  Alienation  of  its  leaders 
from  Erskinc.  443.  Its  effort  to  pro- 
claim and  eulogize  an  amalgamation 
of  political  sentiments  and  views. 
&c.,  III.  317.  318.  Its  distrust  of  the 
capacity  of  mankind  for  self  govern- 
ment, ills.  [See  II.  439,  461,  171. 
535,  53(1.     III.  483.     IV.  37.] 

"Federalist,  The")  Its  authors,  I. 
400.  Extracts  from.  620,  632,  (Ml. 
So.  11.   II.  4.'>.  17.       Xo.    39.   III.   327. 

IV.  43   49.  62.  03.  100,  425.      Xo.  41. 


|    IV.  211.     Xo.  12.  IV.  15.  257.    s 

IV.  I  tit).  No.  15.  IV.  255,  256.  No. 
19.  IV.  176.  No.  ;,|.  111.  154.  IV. 
177.  No.  64.  IV.  li:,.  170.  177. 
No.  69.  IV.  369.  No.  73.  IV.  369. 
The  1st  and  2nd  editions  of  the  work. 
111.  58.     3    ;gestion  to  include  in  a 

proposed    new    edition    of     the    Work. 

the  Articles  oi  Confederation,  ami 
Constitution  oi  D.  S..  and  to  exclude 
••  Pacificus,"  and  "  Heh  idius,"  5  - 
60.  Gideon's  Edition,  49,  110.  His- 
torv.  objects  and  authorship  of  the 
papers,  99.  100.  IV.  in;.  176.  Erro- 
neous assignments  of  authorship  in  a 
New  York  edition,  111.  100.  By  Ham- 
ilton 126.  IV.  [15.  Respecting  the 
power  of  removal  from  office.  .V    [See 

I.  360,  361.  362,  367,  4<i7.  592.  ill. 
126,  22H.  481,  1-2.  IV.  17.  115.  120, 
210.  230.  231,  308,  314.  317.  3t>:>.4^1.] 

/■:  ;,-.  's  Dictionary,  I.  145. 

l'Kt.i.KM'.Kia;.  Emanuel  Vox.  His  agri- 
cultural establishment  in  Switzer- 
land. III.  586. 

Fendall,  Philip  R.,  Letter  to  : 

12  June,  1833,  IV.  302. 

Ff.nno.  John.  His  newspaper,  the  Ga- 
zette   of    the    United    States.    1 

II.  141.     IV.  304,  305. 

Ferrand,  Gen.   Marie  Lous.  Captain 
Genera]  at  St.  Domingo.     His  edict, 
varying  the  law  of  nations  as  to  pira- 
cy.    Its  enormity.  II.  211. 
system,  I.  348. 

Few.  William.  I.  522.  550.     IV.  181. 

Finance.  [See  "  Currency,"  "  Mo- 
ney.'" ••  Tax.'"  &C.]  II.  588.  5.-9.  590 
591. 

Finch.  John,  Letters  to  : 
June.   1824,     III.  Ill 

13  May,    1828,      -     033 
20  June.  L829,     IV.     41 

His  •■  Essay  on  the  effect  of  the  Phys- 
ical Geography  of  the  earth,  on  the 
boundaries  of  empires.'"  111.  (133.  IV. 
41. 

"Fmgal,  The,"  II.  nil. 

"  Fiscal  party,"  I.  579.    II.  10. 

Fisheries,  The,  II.  595.  HL  463, 467, 
470. 

Fishes.  Their  numerous  species,  III.  68. 

Fitzhekbkk  i.  Allevnk.  British  am- 
bassador to  Spain.  I.  526. 

Fitzhugh,  William,  of  Chatham.  An 
Elector  of  P.  and  V.  P.  in  1789,  I. 
457.      [See  I    224.] 

Fitzsimmo.ns.  Thomas.  Extract  from  hia 
speech  in  the  F:rst  Congress,  IV.  244, 


012 


<;  i:  N  er  al    i  N  i)  i:x 


[FLA  —  FRA 


245,  247.     In  IT.  R.  [IT!'!]  "Repll '1 

by  Swanwick  a  stunning  change  for 
the  aristocracy,"  II.  L9.  [See  II  5,  21, 
26,  29,  103.] 

Flanders,  III.  653,  654. 

Flax,  Machine  for  preparing  it.  III. 
225,  226. 

Fleta,  II.  39. 

Fletcher  and  Tolee,  Editors  of  the 
Lynchburg  Virginian,  Letters  to: 
id  October,  L827,  III.  590 
1  I  ( tctober,      "       "     592 
:;i  October,      "       "     592 

Florence,  III.  <i.r»:s. 

Florida.  Unlawfulness  of  ;i  purposed 
expedition  on  Florida,  and  duty  of 
the  Executive,  II.  482. 

East  Florida.     II.  488,534. 

West  Florida.  II.  191,  484.  Occupan- 
cy by  fJ.  S.  of  W.  F.  as  far  us  the  Per- 
dido,  188.  [See  II.  440,  520,  521.  III. 
117.  [19,  199.] 

Flournoy,  Gen.,  III.  391,  392,  393. 

Floyd.  Mr.,  I.  453. 

Floyd,  Gen.,  III.  391. 

Floyd, .  (of  N.  V.)  II.  35. 

Folger,  Frederick,  II.  12. 

Food  of  men,  plants,  &c,  68,  ".">. 

Foot,  Samuel  A.,  III.  634. 

Foreign  Minister.  [See  "Office," 
■■  Public  Minister."] 

Forest, ,  La.,  [French  consul?  ]  I. 

586.     114. 

Forts.  Defiance,  11.  549.  Erie,  III. 
:;:h,.    Jackson,  108.     Wayne,  II.  549. 

Forte  Piano,  II.  L6. 

FbssU  Tree,  111.  257. 

Foster,  Augustus  J.,  Minister  from  G. 
B.  to  l'.  S.,  II.  493,  508,  515,  544,  549, 
111.  445,554. 

Fox,    Charles    James,     Notice  of    a 

-1 :h  ni   F.  in  1781,  I  53.      [See  II. 

39,  221,  223,  224,  271,  103,  491.] 

France.  Complaint  of  a  French  Vice 
Consul,  I.  1 13.  Interest  of  France  in 
the  Mississippi  question,  100,  L39. 
Her  influence  over  Spain,  1  10.  French 
affairs,  380,  382,  129,  154,  193,  194, 
502,  509,  513,  527,  545,  .">71.  572,  ."'7.".. 
580,  583.  II.  11.  12,  32,33,61,  62,  72, 
78,79,  90,  111.  182,  204,  205,213, 218, 
493,  49  I.  530,  .r>.">7.  Regulations  con- 
cerning Tobacco,  I.  537.  Eminent 
and  generous  aids  of  the  French  na- 
tion to  the  V.  S.j  &c.  Their  gratitude, 
and  sympathy  in  its  contest  for  its 
liberty,  600.  Destiny  of  the  Revolu- 
tion transferred  from  the  civil  to 
the  military  authority,  11.  156.    Defec- 


tion from  liberty.  158.  Conjectures 
respecting  negotiations  with  E  i 
161.  French  Convention,  168.  Blanks 
left  in  letters  of  credence  of  I  .  S. 
Ministers  to  France,  to  be  filled  up  in 
adjustment  to  new  Re\  olutions,  205. 
Alleged  irregularities  of  French  Bhips 
ot  U  ar  in  the  harbor  of  N.  York,  207. 
French  live  port  Act,  1784,  311.  Bill 
of  nmi  -  intercourse  with  1'..  1 1">. 
Evacuation  of  F.  by  the  occupying 
armies,  111.  114.  Revives  the  doctrine 
of  the  Divine  right  of  Kings,  aud  as- 
Berts  the  right  in  everj  Government 
to  overthrow  a  neighbouring  one 
which  reproaches  its  corruption  by 
the  precedent  of  reformation,  330, 
340,  341.  Her  edict,  lit  November 
1 7 : » J .  promising  "fraternity  and  assis- 
tance, i"  all  people  who  wish  to  re- 
cover their  liberty,"  330,  331.  French 
reception  given  to  the  notification  of 
the  British  ambassador  at  Paris,  354 
Explanations,  statements  and  corres- 
pondence respecting  her  conduct  in 
the  negotiations  for  the  Treaty  of 
peace  ol  1782,  between  fJ.  S.  and  < ',. 
B.  153  170.  Elections.  619.  Revo- 
lution of  1830.  Probable  necessity 
of  the  Constitutional  monarchy  adopt 
ed,  IV.  ill.  Contingent  suggestion 
of  a  Federal  mixture,  141,  1  12.  Dep- 
recation of  a  war  wiih  France,  374, 
375.  Controversy  with,  426.  [See  I. 
I  in.  :\<r:.  II.  104,  105,  L10,  113,  115, 
122,  124,  137,  144,  147,  1  18,  151,  152, 
159,  164,  169,  426,  429,  130.  139,  I  15, 
4.")i).  459,  472.  164.  17."..  176,  177.  178, 
179,  180,  182^  184,  187,  193,  194,  508, 
518  519,  520,  526,  527,  528,  529,  535, 
511.  585.  601,  609.  III.  t.  1  I.  112, 
130,  176,  191,  310,  329,  399,  401,  147, 
628.  650,  653,  654.  IV.  30,  39,  40,  60, 
lit.'.  242,  346,  347,  1 16,  152,  467,501.] 

Francis,  Dr.  John  W.,  Letters  to  : 
9  July,  1831,  IN'.  188 

7  Nu\  ember,      "      "     200 
His  address  to  the  Pbilolexican  So- 
ciety of  Columbia  College,  N.  V.  IV. 
200. 

Franklin,  Doctor  Benjamin.  Occur- 
rence between  him  and  Dr.  Arthur 
Lee,  I.  62.  His  sketch  of  the  Ai 
of  Confederation,  70.  Mazzei's  enmity 
towards  him,  78.  Homage  to  his  char- 
acter on  his  return  to  0".  S..  198. 
Translation,  erroneously  attributed  to 
him,  of  Horace's  22d  <  >de,  Book  L, 
111.  582,  585.    His  Canadian  pamph- 


FRA— GEN] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


or.', 


let,  654.  His  autobiography,  IV,  175. 
His  proposition  in  favor  of  a  religious 
service,  in  the  Federal  Convention, 
339.  His  letter,  20  July,  1765,  to 
Lord  Howe,  358.  [See  III.  343.  IV. 
83.  1G9.  111.] 

Franklin,  T..   I.   L98. 

••  Franklin."  reputed  author  of,  [.  591. 

Frankness,  advantage  of,  IV.  520. 

Fraud  in  taking  out  administration  on 
the  effects  of  deceased  soldiers  and 
other  claimants  leaving  no  represen- 
tatives, I.  534. 

••  A  Friend  of  the  Union  and  State 
Rights,"  Letter  to  : 
1833,  IV.  334. 

Frederick,  K.  of  Prussia.  A  genuine 
copy  of  his  works  wanted,  1.  465. 

•■  Frederick  Molke,"  Case  of  "The,"  II. 
322, 

Fredericksburg,  I.  448,  470,  488,  511, 
579,605,     [11.472. 

Fredericktoum,  Md.  III.  424. 

Fret  persons  of  color.  [See  "American 
Colonization  Society,"  "  Missouri."] 
Their  various  disqualifications,  &c,  in 
most  of  the  States,  HI.  190.  Prohibi- 
tion in  Massachusetts  against  their  be- 
coming residents.  Everywhere  regard- 
ed as  a  nuisance.  Their  rapid  increase 
from  manumissions,  and  from  off- 
springs, 240.  Iu  Virginia  they  consid- 
er themselves  as  more  closely  connec- 
ted with  the  slaves  than  with  the 
white  population.  &c.  Generally  idle 
and  depraved.  &C.,  315. 

•'  Free  slaps  make  free  goods,''  II.  4G7, 
585,586.    III.  298.    IV.  375,  434. 

"  Free  Trade.1'  [See  "  Trade."]  II. 
478,  648,  649. 

French  forests.  III.  10!). 

French  Ship,  burning  of  a,  II.  472. 

Freeman,  i>u..  HI.  28. 

Frenau,  Philip,  His  newspaper,  "  The 
National  Gazette,"  IV.  304,  305.  His 
clerkship  in  the  Department  of  State, 
I.  569,  570.  IV.  301.  [See  I.  534, 
543,  547.  501.] 

Fuller,  Mil,  IV.  362. 

Fulton,  Mil,  II.  93.  96,  101.  [See  II. 
493.] 

Funding  system.    IV.  485. 

G. 

Gaines.  Gen.  Edmund  P.,  Letter  to: 
15  November,  1826,  III.  53G. 
His  gallant  and  brilliant   services  in 
the  War  of  1S12,  III.  53G.     It  may  be 


better   that  a  resort  to  certain  "ex- 
treme measures  '"  mentioned  in  . 
ter  from   him,   "  should   result-  from 
military  discretion,  guided  by  imperi 
ous  emergencies,  than  be  prescribed 
by  the  Executive,  without   the  sanc- 
tion of  the  authority  more  competent 
to  such  decisions,  8.    Court  of  Inqui- 
ry, Court  .Martial  and  trial,  536.    [See 
I'll.  405,412,  413.] 
Gales,  Joseph  Jr.,  Letter  to: 
26  August,   1821.  III.  22G. 
Extract  of  a  letter  from  him,  III.  241. 
Gales  and  Seaton,  Letters  to  : 
2  February.  1818,  IH.    59 
5  August,"    1833,  IV.  304 
Galiani  Ferdinand.     [His  treatise  on 

the  Armed  Neutrality.]     II.  37G. 
Gallattn,  Albert,  Letters  to  : 
29  August,  1810,     II.  482 
2  August,  1813,      "    566 
.March.     IS  17,    III.     37 
13  July,       1829,     IV.     41 
Extract  of  a  letter  from  him,  7  Janu- 
ary, 1803,  II.  179.      Secretary  of  the 
Treasury.     A  liberty  taken    in   some 
of  the  instructions  given  by  his  circu- 
lar,   in    1809,    452.     Rejection   of   his 
nomination    as    Minister    to     Russia. 
(1813)    5G7,    5C8.    5G9.      Minister    to 
France,   (1816)   III.   3.      Minister   to 
England,  (182G)  IV  5G5.     [See  II.  29, 
39.  76,  185,  217,  440,  446,  451).   4G1, 
479,   507,   512,   528.       III.    34,   485, 
571.] 

Galloway,  Joseph,  I.  2. 
Galusha,  Jonas,    Governor  op  Ver- 
mont.   Letter  to  : 

30  November,  1812.  II.  550 
Gano,  A.  G.,  and  A.  N.  Riddle, 
Letter  to  : 

25  March.  1835,  IV.  377 
Gardoqui,    Diego    de,    Minister  from 
Spain    to  U.  S.      His   arrival.  I.  15S. 
His    overture  to    the    people  of  Ken- 
tucky. IV.  365.     [See  I.   I  GO.] 
Garnett,  Robert  S..  Letters  to 
11  February  1824,  III.  365 
22  April,    "      '•         "     437 
Gates,  Gen.  Horatio,  Clamor  against 
him.  on  his  defeat  at  Camden.     His 
recall,  I.  44,  45.     [See  I.    118,    124, 
387.] 

Gelston, ,11.  1G0.  1G5.  16G,  440, 

450.     [See  II.  210.] 
Gem.  Dr.,  IV.  303. 

Greneral  assessment.    Bill  for  it  in  the 
Legislature  of  Va.,  I.  88. 


014 


(jl  E  N  ERAL     IN  I)  E  X 


[GEN  —  GIL 


Geueral  diet,  I.  298,  299,  300. 
General  ticket,  II.  155,  156,  157,  159. 

•■  General  welfare.  [See  "Common  De- 
fence and  General  Welfare."] 
Amalgamating  magic  of  the  terms, 
ill.  483,  508.  Use  of  the  phrase  in  a 
Congressional  Report,  GtiO.  [III.  305, 
Goo.]  A  new  and  alarming  doctrine, 
founded  on  this  phrase  in  the  Consti- 
tution, broached  in  Hamilton's  Re- 
port on  Manufactures.  Origin  and 
true  import  of  the  phrase,  I.  546,  -"'17. 

Genet,  Edmond  C,  Minister  from 
France.  Bis  arrival  in  U.S.,  1.578, 
579.  His  reception,  579.  His  folly, 
586,590.  His  indiscretions,  595.  His 
unaccountable  and  distressing  con- 
duct, 596.  Use  made  of  it,  and  anti- 
dote to  the  poison,  596.  Ideas,  for 
the  use  of  county  meetings,  sketched 
on  the  first  rumor  of  the  war  between 
the  Executive  and  Genet,  597,  5(,)9 — 
601.  His  conduct  that  of  a  madman, 
Its  effects,  601.  [See  I.  598.  11.2,3. 
4,585.     III.  298.] 

Geography.  The  "  right  "  eye  of  histo- 
ry. III.  205.  Suggestion  to  include  it 
iu  a  course  of  instruction  of  the  peo- 
ple. 280. 

Geology,  III.  257.  025.  626. 

George  III.  Ilis  disability,  I.  462, 
465.     [See  II.  224.] 

George,  Prince  of  Wales.  Discussion 
between  him  and  Pitt,  I.  4(>2.  Prince 
Regent.  His  reported  Cabinet,  II. 
490.  His  conciliatory  disposition,  &c, 
515.  Effect  of  a  fashion  introduced 
by  him  in  distressing  a  class  of  labor- 
ers, 111.  576.  IV.  476,  -177.  Import- 
ant reflections  suggested  by  the  Ad- 
dress of  buckle  manufacturers  to  him. 
477.     [See  II.  531,  536.] 

Georgetown,  I).  C,  I.  73,  579. 

Georgia.  [See  ■•  Indians,"  &c]  Com- 
missioners from  Georgia  in  1785, 
to  the  Spanish  Governor  of  N.  Or- 
leans :  an  outrage  on  the  Federal 
Constitution,  I.  155.  Her  omission  to 
send  Commissioners  to  Annapolis, 
246.  Inflexible,  in  the  federal  Con- 
vention, on  the  point  of  the  Slaves. 
353.  Danger  of  Indian  "War  in  G., 
.".57.  Electoral  votes.  451.  Her  op- 
position in  the  Convention  of  I7s7  to 
a  Federal  power  prohibiting  the  Afri 
can  Slave  Trade.  111.  150.  '  [See  III. 
152,  213,  399,  131.  IV.  13.  5:;.  51.  255. 
-117.  o'>'.).  "  Georgia  business,"  Re- 
port to   the  Senate  of  U.  S.  on  it,  III. 


569.  Discontent  at  the  tardy  r  anoval 
Of  the  Indians  from  land-  within  hei 
State  Limits,  619.  [See  I.  279,  281. 
284,  370,  37  1.  597,  606,  662.] 

German  troops  in  New  Fbrfc,  Their  dis- 
contents, I.  1 1. 

Germanic  Confederacy,  I.  309 — 315, 
:;i7. 

Germans  in  Philadelphia,  I-  356. 

Gerry,  Elbridge,  a  dele-ate  from 
Massachusetts  to  the  Federal  Conven- 
tion, I.  282.  Refuses  to  subscribe  to 
the  Constitution.  Not  inveterate  in 
opposition  to  it.  354.  Hi-  s<  i 
and  merits  in  the  ( invention  of  J7 87, 
IV.  2  15.  His  appearance,  Ac.,  in  the 
Massachusetts  Convention,  1.  371,  372, 
373..  Biography  of  him,  ILL  292.  [See 
I.  360,  368,  371,  189.  II.  151.  HI. 
291.     IV.  32,  2  17.] 

Ghent.  Despatches  from,  H.  589.  Dis- 
cussions a!.  596.       Treaty  of,  Hi. 

IV.  361.     A  noticeable  circums 
relating  to  it,  HI.  558.       [See  II.  600, 
611.] 

Gibbon,    Edward,      Hi-    posthumous 

works.  Ml.  127.  179. 

Gideon,  Jacob,  Letters  to  : 
28  January,     1818,    III.    58 
20  February,     "         "     59 

20  August."        "  ''     110 

Giles,  William  1'...  Leti  i  b  to  : 

5  September,  L827,  HI.  588 

His  ••  Resolutions"  concerning  Ham- 
ilton's administration  of  the  Treasury 
Department.  1.  575.  His  motion  to 
add  to  the  Naturalization  oath,  a 
clause  renouncing  titles,  Ac  II.  30. 
His  Resolution  concerning  F.  -I.  .lack- 
son.  t69.  (  rOVernor  of  Virginia.  III. 
591,  592.  His  "  Retrospects,"  No.  11, 
and  misstatement  of  a  doctrine  of 
Jefferson,  IV.  18.  [See  II.  72.  77, 
126,  152.  153.  151.  155.  IV.  199,207, 
296,  111.  n. 
Gilchrist,  Mr.,   An  elector  of  P.  and 

V.  P.,  I.  449. 

Gillespie  mid  Smith,  Suit  of.  IV.  153, 
158. 
On. i.ow  Alexander.  II.  20,  26. 
GlLMAN,  Nicholas.  IV.  217. 

GlI.MKK.   .   I.  5(12. 

On, Mia:.    Francis,   HI.   343,   353,   437, 

4  17.  118.  517. 
Gilmer,  Thomas,  Letter  to  : 

6  September,  1830,  IV.  107. 
On. mki;  Thomas  YV..  and  otulks 

Letter  to  : 

1835,  IV.  33S. 


0  i:  i;  ] 


(i  i:  N  K  R  A  L    IX  D  EX 


015 


Gilpin,  Henry  l>..  Letters  to  : 
25  October,  [827,  III.  593 
in  January,   L828,    "    610 

I  I  January,     "         "    610 

Errora   in   his   Life  "I   Jefferson,  III. 
5!)3,  594. 
Gilpin.  Dr.  Joshua,  Letter  to  : 

II  March,  1822,  III.  262. 

de,  Thomas,  11.  530. 

Girardin,  Louis  II..  His  and  Jones's 
continuation  of  Burk's  Bistory  of  Vir- 
ginia, III.  205,  .">:;:;. 

Glass.  Francis,  Letter  to  : 
8  August,  L821.  III.  'Jus 
1 1 1  — i    I. it''   "I'   Washington,  written   in 
Latin.  "  I'm-  the  use  of  schools."     Pro- 
posed Dedication  of  it.  ILL  208. 

GODDARD,  Mi:..  1  V.  384. 

Godot,  Manuel,  Prince  of  the  Peace. 
Hi-  vanity.  II.  209. 

Godwin,  William.  His  attack  on  Mal- 
thus,  111.  20!)  216,  234,  235,  264.  A 
dogmatist  ami  a  theorist,  209.  I  lis 
barefaced  errors,  350. 

GOLDSBOROUGH,  ROBERT  II..  LETTER  TO  : 

21  December,  1835,  IV.  386. 

Goldsmith,  Oliver,  His  Histories  of 
( rreece  ami  Rome,  III.  205. 

Goodhue,  Benjamin,  II.  29. 

'•  Gordian''  questions,  HI.  634.  IV. 
169. 

Gordon,  William,  His  History  of  the 
American  War.  II.  150. 

Gore,  Christopher,  H.  103. 

Gore,  Lieut.,  HI.  101. 

Gorham,  Nathaniel,  A  delegate  from 
Massachusetts  to  the  Federal  Conven- 
tion, I.  282. 

Gottenberg,  II.  582. 

Gout,  III.'-.':'."). 

Go;  vernei  i.'.  Samuel  L..  HI.  189. 

Government,  IV.  167. 

Governmerd  de  facto,  HI.  3. 

Government  op  United  States,  IV. 
47 'l —  171.  [Scr  "Constitution  of 
U.S.."'  '•  United  States."]  Distribu- 
tion i'l'  power  into  separate  Depart- 
ments, IV.  472.  Division,  Ac  in  L'. 
S.,  47::. 

Gracchi,  The,  T.  395. 

Graduating  Certificates,  I.  268. 

Grafting.  It-  operation  dors  not  ex- 
tend  beyond  plants  having  a  certain 
affinity  for  each  oilier.  III.  69. 

Graham,  George,  Commissioner  of  the 
General  Land  Office,  Letter  to  : 
5  April,  1S27.  HI.  575, 

Graham,  Shi  James.  IV.  3.39. 


Grab  lm,  John,  <  Ihief  '  lerk  in  the  I  de- 
partment of  Siaio.  Letter  to  : 
28  August,  1-  13,  II.  .371. 
[See  II.  210,  542.] 

Grand  Chenan,  Island  of,  ~l'l  I. 

Grand  Juries.  Abuse  of  their  functions 
II.  lis.  122. 

Granger,  Gideon,  Postmaster  <  General 
II.  2i)3.  533. 

Grantham,  Lord,  III.  465,  470. 

Grasse,  Francis  .1.  I'..  <  'mini  de,  and 
Admiral,  III.  462,  463,  166.  His 
daughters,  II.  81. 

Grasshoppers.  Their  injuries  to  Tobac- 
co crops.  I.  159. 

Grayson,  William.  A  Delegate  Iron 
Virginia  to  the  Continental  Congress. 
Unfriendly  to  a  power  in  Congress  to 
regulate  trade,  I.  L97,  262  —264.  A 
Senator  from  Virginia,  442.  An  op- 
ponent of  the  new  Constitution.  410. 
[See  1.  142,  L69,  221,  239,  248,  250, 
387,  472,  483,  497,  499,  .".mi.  IV.  562, 
563.] 

Great  Britain.  [See  "Neutrals, 
Treaty  op  Peace."]  Rumor  of  an 
expected  Bill  concerning  Trade,  I.  41. 
Her  strenuous  exertions  in  1781  for 
carrying  on  the  war,  43.  Conjectured 
views  of  the  British  Cabinet,  59. 
Progress  of  the  Definitive  Treaty. 
Bill  in  Parliament,  (in  1783),  for 
opening  trade  with  U.  S.,  65.  Vari- 
ance with  G.  B.  Her  probable  policy, 
121.  Her  monopoly  of  trade  with 
Virginia,  156,  158.  Her  exclusive 
policy  as  to  Trade.  170.  Her  machi- 
nations with  regard  to  commerce.  173, 
The  Treaty  of  Peace.  210,  -J70.  G. 
B.  itching  for  war.  521.  Peace  with 
Spain.  526,  .*>-7.  Prospect  as  to  a 
Mission  to  U.  S.,  535,  f>:;7.  The  war 
on  American  commerce,  602.  In  the 
British  Government,  the  powers  of 
making  treaties  and  declaring  war 
are  Royal  prerogatives,  and  accord- 
ingly treated  as  Executive  preroga- 
tives by  British  commentators.  619. 
Allegation  that  British  armaments  in 
W.  Indies  are  supplied  by  purchases 
made  in  X.  York  and  in  the  Eastern 
Stales,  and  that  American  vessels  are 
chartering  for  conveying  them,  II.  4. 
British  outrages.  .">.  British  seizure  of 
American  vessels  in  W.  I.,  (!.  Propo- 
sitions levelled  at  her  in  II.  1!.,  10. 
Treaty  with.  November  17,  1794. 
[See   ••  Jay,  Jonx," "]     Influences  ex- 


GIG 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[  g  r  e  —  am 


erted  to  procure  petitions  in  its  favor, 
98.  Influences,  &c,  exerted  in  favor 
of  Jay's  Treaty,  101,102.  Accurate 
A  !•..  \  iew  of  the  British  <  lonstitntion, 
144  Expected  rupture  with  Prance, 
182.  Feeling  inwards  [' .  S..  201,4(35, 
480.  Decision  in  the  Admiralty  Courts 
respecting  Colonial  produce,  &c,  213. 
Her  conduct  towards  neutrals,  290 
—349.  Her  system,  339,  340.  Out- 
rages of  her  naval  commanders,  405. 
Disregard  of  tbe  President's  procla- 
mation, 407.  Enmity  of  British  Cab- 
inet to  U.  S.,  425.  Its  jealousies,  HI. 
34.  New  orders.  A  crooked  proceed- 
ing, II.  443.  Conjectured  course  as 
to  Erskine's  "arrangements,"  444. 
Disavowal  of  the  solemn  arrangement 
with  Erskine,  454,  458.  Orders  in 
Council.  460  —  470,  518.  531.  541 
543.  III.  444,  445,  446,  554.  IV.  346 
347.  348.  Her  propensity  to  fish  in 
troubled  waters,  II.  485.  Cabinet  in- 
flexible in  folly  and  depravity.  4'.):;. 
Declaration  of  war  by  U.  S.  againsi 
G.B.,  536,  537,  538.  Proclamation 
of  P.  R.  concerning  naturalized  citi- 
zens, 11.558,559.  Her  arroganl  prop- 
ositions at  Ghent.  589,  600.  Peace, 
601.  British  W.  I.  Navigation  Act, 
111.  38.  British  affairs  in  a  paroxysm. 
Conjecture,  40.  Her  monopoly  of 
navigation  between  U.  S.  and  British 
Colonies,  4.  Negotiation  for  a  com- 
mercial treaty  between  IT.  S.  and  (J. 
B.,  103.  Her  responsibility  as  to  ne- 
gro slavery  in  Virginia,  122.  British 
factors  in  Virginia,  123.  Regretted 
omissions  in  the  Treaty  of  1815  with 
U.  S.,  128.  Her  endeavor  for  inde- 
pendence as  to  the  supplies  of  food, 
129.  Her  inflexibility  on  the  points 
in  question  with  U.  S.,  209.  Probable 
future  abatement  of  her  naval  as- 
cendency, 236,  239.  Notice  of  0".  S. 
in  an  English  pamphlet,  indicating  a 
change  of  tone.  264,  357.  Impatience 
to  learn  her  course  on  the  crusade  of 
Louis  XVIII.  against  Spain.  310,  329. 
Her  conduct  in  17:i2  and  present  pas- 
siveness.  330,  331,  340,  352,  354.  Her 
policy  respecting  the  Revolutionized 
col. mies  of  Spain.  339,340,3  I  1 .3  15,353, 
354.  Her  proneness  to  unnecessary 
wars,  340.  Seems,  alone  among  the 
European  powers,  to  have  really  at 
heart  the  abolition  of  the  Slave  Trade, 
344.  Inconsistency  with  other  parts 
of  her   conduct  of   her  experiment 


&C,  in  denominating  the  African 
trade  piracy,  344.  Alienation 
in  progress  between  (i.  B.  and  the 
ruling  powers  of  the  continent,  '.'>'>'■>. 
Effects  of  the  loss  of  the  Ameri- 
can colonies,  356.  Her  concessions  at 
the  Treaty  of  peace  in  1782,  l7o.  At- 
tempt to  vindicate  her  claim  to  a  mo- 
nopoly of  navigation  between  her  co- 
lonial and  foreign  ports,  578,  579. 
The  main  ami  admitted  object  of  the 
Parliamentary  regulations  of  trade 
with  the  Colonies  was  the  encourage- 
ment of  manufactures  in  <;.  !>..  638 
In  collecting  a  revenue1  from  the  com- 
merce of  America,  (i.  B.  called  it 
either  a  tax  for  the  regulation  of 
trade,  or  a  regulation  of  trade  with  a 
view  to  the  tax,  as  it  suited  the  argu- 
ment or  policy  of  the  moment,  114. 
Her  pretensions  and  Colonial  pol- 
icy, 649,  650.  Comparative  strength 
of  her  Government,  IV.  143.  Brit- 
ish Treaty  on  the  subject  of 
debts  the  source  of  so  much  subse- 
quent agitation,  303.  Anticipation 
that  she  will  put  an  end  to  the  prac- 
tice of  impressment  at  home,  and 
some  of  her  pretensions  on  the  High 
seas,  &c,  361,  434.  Possible  interposi- 
tion of  her  friendly  offices  in  the  con- 
troversy between  (J.  S.  and  France, 
426.  Her  capacity,  in  1791,  for  emi- 
gration. 455.  The  primitive,  compar- 
ed with  the  present,  form  of  the  Brit- 
ish Government,  470.  Her  concilia- 
tory conduct  towards  V.  S.  in  1783-'84, 
498.  A  minister  sent  to  her  by  U.  S. 
[in  1785],  498,  The  civility  nol  re- 
turned during  the  whole  period  of  his 
resilience.  499.  A  minister  first  sent  by 
her  to  U.  S.,  [in  1791],  499.  Another 
minister  from  U.  S.  to  G.  B.,  199.  Her 
policy  when  she  apprehended,  and 
when  she  did  not  apprehend,  commer- 
cial restrictions,  from  U.  S.,  500. 
[See  I.  103,  389.  470,  172,  17 1.  480, 
485,  518,  575.  II.  Liu.  7s.  79,  105,  115, 
124,  164,  175,  176.  L85,  186,  187,  190, 
200,  216,  218,  219,  403,  405.  129,  430. 
131,  439,  151,  459,  472.  474,475—477, 
479,  480,  184,  186,  487,  488,  189,  190, 
491,  493,  494,  508,  512,  515,  516,  '.21. 
525,  530,  536,  540,  557,  562,  582 
III.  3,  35,  97  —  99,  111.  112,  116.  171. 
180,  341,  399,  401,4  17.  IV.  30,  39  40, 
235.  2  12.  327,  331.  37  1.  1 17.  168.  See 
••  Treaty  of  Peace  with  G.  B."] 
Grecian  Confederacy,  I.  206,  227. 


(■  B  E  —  II  A  M  ] 


G  E  N  i:  R  A  L    I  N  I)  E  X . 


G17 


ITT.  653. 

Greeks.    Tin,  111.   238,  340,  341,  352, 

619.     IV.  39,  in.    Mismanagemenl  of 

the  Greek  equipment  at  N.  York.  HI. 

541. 

Greene,  Gen.  Nathanael,  Succeeds 
Gen.  Gates  in  the  command  of  the 
Southern  army.  His  military  opera- 
tions, I  !•"'.  His  patriotism, heroism, 
ami  splendid  career,  III.  489. 

GreenleaF, ,  His   newspaper,  I. 

539. 

Greenland,  III.  66,  loo.  101. 
Gkej    dp  I    >     -  fopheb,  1.  561 .  .377. 
Greenx     e,  (  0.  )    HI.  413,  II  I. 
GllENVILLE,     Wil.LlAM    \Y..    Lord,     His 
speech  in  II.  L.  in  1801,  II.  283.    [See 
II.  490.] 

Grey,  Charles,  Earl,  IV.  1 13. 
Griffin,  Judge  Cyrus,  I.  108,  109,  2G2. 

272. 

Griffin,  Sami  el,  I.  -153,  458.    II.  26. 
Griffin,  <  Iol.,  1.  468. 
Griffin,  Mi;..  I.  389. 
Grimke,  Thomas  S.,  Letters  to  : 
I.".  January,   1828,  III.  61] 
10  January,  1833,  IV.  266 
(i  January,  1834.     ,;     337 
His   letter  to  th';  people  of  S.  C.  IV. 
266.      His    ••Oration    on    the    -ith    of 
July,"  and  "letter  on  Temperance," 
IV.' .-jo;,. 

Grisou  league,  I.  293. 
Griswold,  Roger,  H.  127.    His  "delib- 
erate riot.'-  H.  129,  130. 
Groningius,  John,  His  "Navigatio  Libe- 
ra." Sec.,  Are..  II.  240.  243,  372. 
Gronovius,    James,     His    "Thesaurus 
Graecarum  Antiquitatum,"  I.  291.  297. 
Grotics,  Hugo,  His  "  Mare  Liberum." 
••  De  Jure  Belli  et  pacis,"  &c,  I.  129, 
309.     II.  334—240,  2  17.  2  Is.  2.33.  367, 
368.  369,  370,  371. 
Grymes,  I...  I.  7.3.  79. 
Guadalupe,  IV.  434. 

Giess,  An  Indian.     Stenographic  ra- 
ther than  Alphabetic,  characters  de- 
vised by  him.  III.  .322. 
Guichen,  L.  1'.  it  I!.  Count  de.  Leaves 
the  W.   Indies.  [.  36. 
Gunboats,  II.  56 1,  .37s. 
Gunn,  James,  II.  20. 
Gurley,  Rev,  Ralph  R„  Letters  to: 
28  December,   1831,  IV.  212 
1833,     '•     27:5 
19  February.      "         "     274 
Gypsum,  Plaster  of  HI.  87. 


TI. 


Habeas  Corpus,  Emergencies  calling  for 
its  suspension,  I.  194,195,  127.  [V.412. 
Hack  i.r.  v.  Richard  S.,  Consul  at  St.  Lu- 
cas.     Betrayed    by  his  confidence  in 
the  judgment  and  experience  of  oth- 
ers into  making  a  null  and  improper 
contract,    II.    437.     Unexceptionable 
delicacy  of  his  conduct,  438. 
Hacklky,  Mr.,  111.  148. 
Hagertt,  Mr.,  III.  627. 
Haley,  Benjamin,  Arrested  in  1777.  as 
an  enemy  to  the  State,  and  bailed,  I 
29.   30. 

Halifax,  II.  544.     III.  390. 
Hall,  Edward,  and  Thomas  Yarrow, 
Letter  to  : 
IS  March,  L809,  II.  433. 
Hall,  Mr.,  III.  21. 

Hamilton,  Alexander,  [See  "  Pacifi- 
cos."]  A  delegate  from  Now  York  to 
the  Federal  Convention.  1.  282.  His 
qualifications  for  the  Department  of 
Finance.  I.  472.  His  plan  of  Reve- 
nue, 501,  .302.  .3117.  508,  31  I.  old.  520. 
His  plan  of  a  Bank,  525.  His  Report 
on  Manufactures.  546.  A  new  and 
alarming  Constitutional  doctrine 
broached  in  it.  540,  548.  His  Reports 
on  new  duties,  funding  system.  Ac. 
.33U.  Another  Report,  -373.  Scrutiny 
into  his  administration  of  the  Treasu- 
ry Department,  575,  579.  His  "Pa- 
cificus."  587,  .391.  599.  Secret  de- 
sign attributed  to  him  by  W.  C. 
Nicolas.  587.  His  ••  prolixity  and 
pertinacity,7'  588.  Progress  of'incpii- 
ry  into  his  official  conduct.  II.  9.  10. 
Talked  of  as  .Minister  to  England.  10, 

II.  ••  Mentor-ship  to  the  Commander 

in-Chief,"  19.  Notice  thai  he  means 
to  resign,  27.  29.  His  valedictory 
Report,  3:;.  3,1;.  His  pamphlet  against 
J.  Adams.  167.  His  erroneous  as- 
signment of  the  authorship  of  certain 
Nos  of  the  -  Federalist. "  HI.  12(1.  IV. 
11.3.  17ii.  Wrote  a  greater  number 
of  the  papers,  llf>.  His  vindication 
in  the  N.  York  Convention  of  1788,  of 
the  compound  rule  of  representation, 

III.  109.      His    connexion    with    the 
preparation  of  Washington's  Farewell  • 
Address,    323,    324.       IV.    11.3.       Dis- 
claimed  an   authority  in    (he  General 
Government  in  the  case  of  Canals,  HI. 

4  3.il.  507.  IV.  13,(1.  n,  1  18.  Extract 
from  his  Report  on  the  Constitutional- 
ity of  the  Bank  of  I'.  S.,  in  which  he 
opposes  a  resort,  in  expounding  the 


018 


GENERAL     INDEX 


[HAM—  iiei 


Constitution,  to  the  rejection  of  a 
proposition  in  the  I  !onvention,  or  to 
any  evidence  extrinsic  to  the  text. 
Contrasted  advice  to  President  Wash- 
ington, in  combatting  a  call  of  II.  It. 
for  papers.  III.  515.  His  broad  and 
ductile  rules  of  construction,  IV.  l. 
His  change  of  opinion  respecting  the 
power  of  removal  from  office,  5.  A 
statement  charging  him  with  partici- 
pating in  a  project  for  severing  the 
Union.  Its  obvious  improbability,  31, 
:;_'.  Features  of  his  character,  17(i. 
Instance  of  the  fallibility  to  which 
his  memory  was  occasionally  subject, 
in  his  statement  respecting  his  draught 
of  a  Constitution  which  he  had  placed 
in  Madison's  hands.  M.'s  "  perfect  con- 
fidence that  the  misstatement  was  in- 
voluntary, and  that  he  was  incapable  of 
any  that  was  nol  so."  177.  [See  II. 
481.  III.  133.  IV.  380,  381.  and  It's 
'•  Plan  of  a  Constitution,"  in  the  Mad- 
ison papers,"  Vol.  III.  Appendix,  No.  5, 
p.  xvi.  —  xxviii]  [See  II.  35,  76,  81, 
84,  87,  90,  97,  111.  162,  168.  III.  659. 
IV.  16,  71.  168.  381,  4-ls.] 

Hamilton.  Alexander.  Letter  to  : 
!i  July.  1831,  IV.  138. 

Hamilton,  J  uies  M  uor,  Letter  to  : 
13  December.  1828,  III.  Will. 
Dissent  from  some  of  the  doctrines  of 
his    speech     of     21    October,     1828, 
III.  660. 

Hamilton,  Paxil,  Letter  to: 
31  December.  1812,  II.  551. 
Resigns  the  office  of  Secretary  of  the 
Navy,  II.  551,557. 

Hammond,  George,  First  Minister  from 
<;  .It,  to  U.  S.  His  ridiculous  sensi- 
bility to  a  supposed  indignity  to  the 
British  Constitution,  1.536.  "  [See  I. 
545.     n.  3,  17,  39.     [V.  499.] 

"Hampden,"  by  Judge  Roane.  IV.  14, 
34,  45,  47.  48. 

Hampton',  Col. .  II.  175. 

Hampton.  Gen.  Wade,  111.  379,  381. 
383.  390,  392.    Lis  resignation,  400. 

Hancock.  John.  His  merits  and  faults, 
1.  .".17.  423.     [See  I.  374,  137,  577.] 

Harbours.  Improvement  of,  4c,  IV. 
90,  91,  1  17,  1  is. 

Hardy, Samuel,  I.  197. 

Hardy,     .    His    extraordinary 

threat.  III.  420. 

II  LRMER.  for.  Josi  \u.  I.  336. 

Harmonites,  The.  III.  497. 

•'  Harmony  Gazette,"  HI.  575. 

Harper,  Robert  G.,  II.  20, 130. 


Harper's  Ferry,  I.  212.    ITT.  426. 
Harrison,  Benjamin,   Governor ofVir- 

ginia,  I.  10!).  I:':;.  133,  I  19,  [52.      His 
election   to   the   Legislature,   and   :i s 
Speaker.    I.    176,    L99,    212.   213.  210, 
■r.vi.    [See  I.  262,  :;i:i.  365,  387.] 
Harbison,  Gen.  William,  Letters  to  : 

5  June.  L830,   I\  , 

1  February.  1831,  "  159 
Resigns  his  commission  in  the  army, 
111.  400.  Minister  to  Colombia,  IV. 
88.  His  "Remarks  on  charges,"  &c. 
Letter  to  Bolivar.  88.  89.  ]See  H.546. 
570.  III.  :i7:i.  :i7>.  379,  380,  381, 
:;s7.  389,  390.  392,  393,  394,  398,  401, 
Hil.  406,  413.  417.  lis.] 

Harrison.  Dr., .  Professor  of 

in  the  University  of  Va..  IV.  35. 

Harrison,  Mbs.,  wife  of  Benjamin  Har- 
rison Jr.     Her  death,  I.  :;:'.!». 

Hartford  Convention,  IV.  :i40. 

Habtley,  Thomas.  Extract  from  his 
speech  in  the  Firsl  Congress,  IV. 
245. 

Harvest.  Its  effect  on  travel.  I.  585. 
[See  II.  16,  557.     HL  35.] 

Harvey,  John,  an  elector  of  P.  and  V. 
P.,  I.  157. 

Hassleb,  .  III.  37,  57n. 

Hawkesbdby,  Lobd,  JI.  171.  175.  202. 

Hawkins's  Abridgment  of  Coke  on 
Littleton.  I.  75. 

Hawkins.  Mr..  I.  281. 

Hawkins,  William, Governor  of  North 
Carolina,  Letteh  to  : 
4  January,  1812,  II.  523. 

Hawkins,  c, ',,...  HI.  388,  398,  399. 

Hay,  Geoboe,  Letter  to  : 
•j:;  Au-iist  1823,  III.  :'..".2. 

His  remedy  for  the  defects  of  the  pres- 
ent mode  of  electing  a  President.  111. 
332,  360.     [See  111.  189.] 

IIaVNE.  ROBEBT  V..  His  Speech.   1  July 

1831.     Its  many  strange  errors.    IV. 
2i)l.      [See  IV.'  7:'.  85,  86,  1U7.  2o2, 
296.] 
HayneS,  C.  K..  Letters  to  : 
25  February,  L831,  IV.  Hit 
27  August,      1832,    ■'     224 
Hays.  William.  His  discovery,  in  sink- 
ing a  well  at  Richmond.  Va..  of  large 

fishbones  and  potter's  ware,  I.  221. 
II  ww  urn.  William,  Letteb  to  : 

21  March.  1809,  II.  134. 
lb  in  r,  Spayed,  Its  qualities  for  draught, 

III.  167. 

Heilaoeb,  Mbs.,  IT.  26. 
HeinECCIUS,  John  T..    His  ••  Prolectio 

nes  "  on  Grotius,  &c,.  II.  372. 


B  0  a] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


019 


Eelvi  leracy,  I.  298  —  302. 

Hi  i.\  i  in  s,  (  Ilaude  A..  His  attempt  to 
.show  that  all  men  came  from  the  hand 
of  nature  perfectlj  equal,  HI.  ">77. 

••  Helyidii  s."  in  :i ii-v.  t'i-  to  "  PACII  i- 
ci  3,"  mi  President  Washington's  Proc 
tarnation  of  Neutrality,  I.  607  65  I. 
( lorrection  of  an  error  of  fact  as  to 
the  use  by  the  President  of  the  term 
"Neutrality ,"  594.  [See  1.  593,  599. 
ill.  .vi.  60,  61.     I\'.  84.] 

Henderson, .  A  Commissioner  from 

Virginia  to  Maryland  to  establish  reg- 
ulations for  the  Potomac,  I 

Hennings,  A.  A.  F.  in:.  His  treatise  on 
Neutrality.  Hi--  collection  of  State 
Papers  during  tin'  war  of  177*.  II. 
•;i»       37  l.  375,  376,  563. 

Henry  IV.  of  Franc.'.  His  political 
characterand  personal  virtues,  II.  I*!'. 

Henky,  John,  H.  530. 

Henry,         .  H.  20. 

Henky,  Patrick,  His  influence  in  the 
Legislature  of  Virginia,  I.  7.">.  His 
supposed  politics  in  L784.  78.  80.  81. 
Saves  from  a  dishonorable  death  a 
project  of  tin'  Episcopal  clergy,  88. 
Father  of  the  Fill  for  Religious  asses- 
ment  in  II.  D.  of  Virginia,  111.  J 13. 
Elected  Governor  uf  Va.,  122.  134. 
His  proposition  I'm-  a  legal  provision 
for  teachers  of  the  Christian  religion, 
130.  Declines  a  re-appointment  as 
Governor,  251,  252.  "  Hitherto  tin1 
champion  of  the  '  Federal  cause.' 
becomes  a  'cold  advocate,'  in  conse- 
quence of  the  affair  of  the  Mississip- 
pi," 264.  A  delegate  to  the  Federal 
Convention,  ^7*>.  Declines  the  ap- 
pointment, 283,  284.  His  "omnipo- 
tence" in  Virginia.  283,  284,  44 F 
Favorable  to  a  paper  emission,  318, 
31L».  332.  Said  to  be  unfriendly  loan 
acceleration    of    justice,    and    to    tin' 

object  of  the  Convention;  and  to 
wish  either  a  partition,  or  total  disso- 
lution of  the  Confederacy,  332,  333. 
Different  conjectures  as  to  his  course 
respecting  the  new  Constitution.  356. 
The  great  adversary  of  the  new  Con- 
stitution, 365.  in.  151.  [Seel.  405, 
418,  430,  Hi'.  4bS,  490,  515.  HI.  543, 
632.]  An  elector  of  P.  and  V.  P.,  I. 
457.  Offer  to  him  of  Secretaryship  of 
State.  11.  62.  Bust  of  him,  HI.  .".04. 
Testimony  as  to  his  intention  to  give 
up  the  contest  with  G.  B.  Extreme 
improbability  of  the  fact,  III.  504. 
[See  I.  87,  1U9,  129,  259,  274,  318,  337, 


364,  366,  378,  379,  387     !  .  309, 

tun.  mi.  in-.'.] 
HERTELL,  Thomas.  LETTER  TO  : 

2n  December,  1809,  II.    161. 

Hi-  Expose  of  the  causes  ami  effects 

of  the  prevailing  intemperance,  &c, 

I'M.  162. 
Hkrvey,  Lord,  Extract  from  his  s] sh 

in  II.  of  Fords  against  the  war  of  175C, 

II.  295. 
Eessianfly,  I.  in-;.     III.  98.  109,  331. 

HlGGINBOTB  \M,  Mr..,  II.  .".  \1. 

Hill,  Mark  F..  Letter  to  : 

April.  1820,  HI.  17.".. 
Hillhoose,  James,  Letter  to  : 

May.  1830,  IV.  77. 
His  proposed  amendment  to  theCoti- 
Btitution  of  F.  S..  pr,i\  iding  that  on 
the  first  Wednesday  of  February 
1837,  and  of  each  succeeding  two 
years,  the  I'.  F.  S.  shall  be  chosen  by 
lot  from  the  class  of  Senators  whose 
term  of  service  shall  first  expire,  and 

constitutionally  eligible  to  the  office 
of  President,  and   V.    F.   be   chosen 

from  the  remaining  Senators  of  the 
same  class  ;  each  to  hold  his  office  loi 
two  years.  F.  may  suspend  office;. 
except.  Judges,  and  assign  reasons 
Ac.  IV.  77. 

Hinde,  Thomas  S.,  Letter  to: 
17  August,  1829.   IV.  4  1. 

Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania,  III. 
552. 

History.  [See  '•  American  Revolu- 
tion," "United  States."]  Different 
plans  for  reading  it.  Looks  recom- 
mended. III.  2o."i.  Its  misfortune  that, 
a  personal  knowledge  and  an  imp  ir 
tial  judgment  seldom  meet  in  the  his- 
torian. 308.  The  best  history  of  F.  S. 
must,  be  tin-  fruit,  of  contributions  be- 
queathed by  temporary  actors  and 
witnesses    to    successors,    who    will 

m. ike  an  unbiassed  use  of  them.  308. 
Truth  and  value  to  be  expected  from 
the  American  Historj .  309.  Materials 
for  it,  IV.  4."..  Materials  at  London 
and  Paris  essential  to  the  history  of 
the  American  Revolution,  68.  Fights 
on  its  diplomatic  history  said  to  exist 
in  foreign  archives,  280.  Usefulness 
of  Historical  Societies  for  a  future 
faithful  history  of  F.  S.,  '.',..'>.  Fs  im- 
portance, 325,  320.  A  good  example, 
373.     [See  IV.  32,  33.] 

IIitk,  Mr.   am.  Mi:s..  I.  529. 

Hoare,  Sin  IF,  His  Continuation  of 
Eustace's  Tour,  III.  179. 


620 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[HOB  —  INI) 


Eobbskoh,  T.  1  IS. 
Hqfflckti  project,  III.  580. 
Hoffman,  David,  Letter  to: 

13  June,  1832,  IV.  223. 

His  Lecture  in  the  University  of  Mary- 
land, IV.  223.  Professor  of  L;iw  in 
thai  University,  292.  Ills  proposed 
visii  iii  Europe,  292. 

Holbert,  (  ?  )  Lady,  III.  536. 

Holkatn  Estate,  III.  580. 

Holland.  [See  "  Ditch."]  Affairs  of, 
I.  335,  361,  369,  382  III.  051).  Its 
example  of  religious  toleration,  275, 
308. 

Holland.  Loud,  His  and  Lord  Auck- 
land's note,  II.  in::,  mi.  Rumor  of 
his  being  Prime  Minister,  490,  491. 

Holmes,  David,  Governor  of  Mississip- 
pi Territory,  III.  398. 

Holmes,  Major  James,  III.  406. 

Holy  Alliance.  Benumbing  influence 
of  U.  S.  and  England  on  all  their 
wicked  enterprises,  III.  417.  [See  III. 
339,  318,  434.] 

Homer, 

Hone,  William.  III.  21fi. 

Hoomes,  Col.,  I.  521,  571,  572. 

Hopes,  The,  II.  394. 

HoPKINSON,  Francis,  IV.  320. 

Horace,  IV.  431. 

"  Hornet.  The;'  II.  529,  532,  533,  535. 

Horse,  Hie.  III.  167.  Compared  with 
the  ox  as  animals  used  in  husbandry, 
89—92,  115,  520, 

Horses.     [.See  "  Tax."] 

II  \rse  stealers.  Rage  against  them,  I.  272. 

"Hostages  toforiune,"  IV.  29. 

Hoodon,  John  A..  I.  231. 

House,  Mks.,  I.  100,  104.  106,  199,  577. 

Housekeepers,  and  Heads  of  families . 
IV.  29. 

Howard,  Gen.,  III.  338,  407. 

How,  Roger,  II.  320. 

Howels, ,  Case  of,  I.  110,  111. 

Howell,  Mr.,  II.  13,  89. 

Hdbner,  Martin,  His  treatise  '•  De  la 
saisie  des  batiinens  neutres."'  11.  372, 
373.  374,  37(1. 

Hughes, .  II.  183,  L85. 

Hull,  Gen.  William,  II.  539,  5  17.  563. 
HI.  -117.  492.  His  trial,  393.  391. 
Considerations  on  which  he  was  ap- 
pointed to  head  the  expedition  into 
Upper  Canada,  557.  llis  ostensible 
fitness  for  it.  561. 

Humboldt,  Alexander,  Baron  de, 
Letter  to  : 

14  March,  1833,  IV.  293. 

His  draughts  or  maps,  II.  531. 


HUME,  David.  TIT.  302.  545.  TV.  58. 
His  history,  III.  205.  His  discourse 
mi  the  balance  of  trade,  IV.  461,  4<J4. 

Humphreys,  <'<>i..  David.  Li.n  eb  ro  : 

23  .March.  1813,  H.  560. 
Minister  to  Spain.  II.  105.     "Strange 
production,"  by  him,  111.  582. 

Hunter,  John,  11.  20. 

Hunting  Life.     Its  attractions.  III.  66. 

Hutbtson,  .  1.  601. 

hontington,  ebud,  letter  to: 
4  January.  1818,  III.  57. 

HURLBERT,  M.  L.,Letter  to  : 
.May  1830,  IV.  73. 

Hyde  de  Neuville,  Letters  to: 

18  July.  1816,  III.     14 
9  December.   1818,    "      111 

19  December,  1828,  "  662 
15  June,  1829,  IV.  39 
26  July,  1830,    "       93 

I. 

Iberville  river,  II.  179. 

Illinois  Territory,  Governor  of,  II. 
159. 

"Immanuel,"  case  of  "  Thc"U.  297.313, 
324,  330,  345,  348. 

Impeachments.  Tribunal  for  trying 
them.  I.  180,  192,  193.     [See  II.  128.] 

Imperial  chamber,  I.  312. 

Impost.  Opposition  to  it,  I.  230,  2  17. 
[See  I.  463,  467,  483,  488.] 

Impressments.  II.  187.  190,  200,  206, 
403,405.441.  A  projeel  concerning 
I..  423,  424,  467.     [Sec  ill.  L13,  :>:>^.j 

Incorporated  companies.  .May  be  use- 
ful, under  given  circumstances,  but 
at,  best,  only  a  necessary  evil,  III. 
567,  568. 

Inconsistency.  The  term  not  applica- 
ble i"  a  change  of  opinion  under  the 
lights  of  experience  and  the  results 
of  improved  reflection,  [V.  210.  [See 
IV.  2 IS.] 

Indemnity  to  individuals  for  injuries 
suffered  in  violation  of  Hull's  capitu- 
lation, 111.  394. 

Indents.  Law  of  Virginia  making 
them  receivable,  I.  257. 

Independence.  [Sec  ••  Declaration  of 
Independence."]  lis  genu  the  prin 
eiple  of  self-taxation  brought  with 
them  by  our  forefathers,  III.  105. 
Discussions  on  the  authority  arrogated 
by  Parliament,  another  grow  Lb  in  the 
stage  of  I..  Ibid.  Share  of  individu- 
als in  it.  105,  106.     [See  111.  609.] 

••  Independent  Reflector"  IV.  Iii3. 


INT] 


GENE  R  A  L     I  X  I )  I  ■:  X 


021 


India,  III.  90. 
Indiana  claim,.  L  399. 
Indiana  T< rritory,  III.  -I II. 

Indians.       [See   "  BeCKWTTH,"    "GEOR- 

i;ia."    ••  Logan,"    "  Monroe,  -I  lmes," 
•'Pi:nn,   Wti.l.l.wi,"     "Treaties."] 

Their  cruelty,  I.  1 « J .  Projected 
treaty  at  Fort  Schuyler,  103.  Ne- 
gotiations of  the  State  of  N.  York 
with  them.  109,  )  1".  Threatened  gen- 
eral combination,  255.  Indian  affairs, 
490.  •■  Talk."  of  P.  U.  S.  to  them  in 
L812,  Q.  553— 556.  A  double  extinc- 
tion of  their  claims  preferable  to  the 
risk  of  injustice,  Ac..  III.  7.  Custom- 
ary rales  for  extinguishing  Indian 
titles.  12.  Their  disinclination  to  ex- 
change the  savage  for  the  civilized 
life,  U  l.  65,  66,  67.  <  'onstitution  of  a 
Society  for  their  beneQt,  259,  260.  261. 
Military  employment  of  tbem,  390. 
Treaty  of  Greenville  in  L795,  H3. 
Document  relating  to  their  civiliza- 
tion, 522.  Report  of  Secretary  Barb- 
our, .V..'2.  Wirt's  views  of  the  quest- 
ion between  <  reorgia  and  the  Cher- 
okees,  IV.  113.  Inappropriateness  of 
argumentative  appeals  to  the  Indians 
founded  on  the  Federal  Constitution, 
or  the  relations  of  the  Onion  to  its 
members,  or  the  charter  from  Eng- 
land. 113,  114.  Plea  for  dispos- 
sessing them  of  the  lands  on  which 
they  have  lived,  that  by  not  incorpor- 
ating their  labor,  and  associating 
fixed  improvements  with  the  soil, 
they  have  not,  appropriated  it  to 
themselves,  nor  made  the  destined  use, 
of  its  capacity  for  increasing  the 
number  and  the  enjoyments  of  the 
human  race.  Answer  to  this  plea, 
1 1  i.  Advantage  to  them  of  a  remov- 
al made  voluntary  by  adequate  in- 
ducements, present  and  prospective, 
414.  Aspect  of  public  proceedings 
towards  the  Indians  within  the  bounds 
of  the  S  ates,  118.  Restriction  on 
the  sale  of  their  lands.  L18.  [See  1. 
108,335.  II.  35.  III.  7,  9,  11,  12,  66, 
(17.  215,  391,  393,  396,  398,  399.  401, 
41).-..  408,  11  I.  417.  419,  488  515,  516, 
552.  561,  619.] 

Indostan.  IV.  47 It. 

Infanticide.  IV.  454. 

Ingersoll,  Charles  J..Letters  to  : 

28  July,  1814,     II.  585 

21  January,     1817,  III.     3? 

4  January.      1818,     "       57 

12  November,  lc2J,     '•'    503 


17  November,  1827,  TTT.  601 
8  January,  1830,  IV.  57 
2  I  ebruary,    1831,     ••     160 

25  June,  "       "     183 

12  February,     ls:;r>,    ••     . 
30  December,      ••        ••     387 
I  1  .May,  1836,    ••      i;;i 

His  proposed  Historical  review  of  the 
War  of  1812,  III.  57.  His  Discourse 
before  the  Penn  Society .  503.  Ills 
••  View  of  the  Committee  powers  of 
Congress,"  IV.  375.  His  Discourse, 
Ac.  386.  His  Address  at  New  York, 
387.  His  literary  merits.  601.  [See 
HI.  656.] 

[xgersoix,  C.  J..  Clement  C.  Beddle, 
1,'ini  \i.i>  Peters,  Letter  to  : 

13  October,   1830,  IV.   1  Is 

[XGERSOLL,  .1  IRED,   II.  Si.  8  I.    87. 
I\\i:s.  Harry,  .Indue   for  the    Pistrict 

of  Kentucky,    I.   Ins,   112.     Attorney 

General    of    Virginia,    21:2.     [See   i. 

356,387.494.] 
Innks.  James,  Commissioner  of  U.  S. 

under  Treaty  of   1794,  II.  lit:;. 
Trisects.    The  different  species  of,  III. 

68. 
Instalments.    Project,   in   Virginia,  of 

an    instalment   of  all    debts,    I.    208, 

339. 
Instruction,  Bight  of,  IV.  12s.  429,  430. 

Instructions  by    a  State   to    her   Repre- 
sentatives iii  ( longress,  III.  509. 
Interest.    Its   justice   in   the   abstract, 

III.  III.  Considerations  respecting 
an  allowance  of  it  on  debts  due  to 
the  public,  141.  142. 
Intemperance.  Experience  of  nations 
as  to  stimulating  substances,  II. 
462. 

Internal  Improvements.    III.   332,  435, 
483.  489.  490,  .vn;.  507,  528.      IV.    si; 

—  93,  I  Pi.  117.  1  17.  210,  297. 
International  Paw  and  usage.  [See 
••  Examination  ok  British  doctrine." 
••  Feruantj,  Mi  P.."  Ac.  Ac]  Quest- 
ion ;is  to  the  Sovereigns  right  to  re- 
ject the  act  of  his  Plenipotentiary.  I. 
<ic  Extraordinary  pretensions  of  a 
British  Naval  Commander  to  the  do- 
minion of  his  ship  over  a  certain 
space,  even  when  lying  in  an  Ameri- 
ican  port.  II.  206.  The  usage  of  na- 
tions seems  to  give  to  those  holding 
the  mouth  or  lower  parts  of  a  river 
no  right  against  those  above  them, 
except  the  right  of  imposing  a  moder- 
ate toll,  IV.  445.  446.  [See  U.  201, 
2U2.] 


622 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


[INT 


JAY 


Interpretation.  Dislinclion  between 
Bench  legislation,  and  judicial  inter- 
pretation, I  V.  223. 

Intoxicating  liquors,  III.  271. 

Invalid  Pensioners.  Unconstitutional 
law  respecting  them,  I.  55  I. 

Invasions.  Historical  examples  of,  I. 
393. 

Iredell,  James,  Judge  of  0.  S.  S.  C, 
J  I.  si,  95. 

Ireland.  [See  "Great  Britain*."] 
Her  capacity,  in  1791,  for  emigration, 
IV.  455.  Trade  with  her,  489.  [See 
III.  212.] 

Iron,  lis  influence  on  the  civilization 
and  increase  of  the  human  race.  III. 
288. 

Irrigation,  I  [I.  88. 

Italy,  III.  90,  G53. 

Ivory,  Mr.,  III.  448. 

Izard,  Gun.  George,  II.  591.  III.  404, 
405,  407,  414,  41(i,  420,  561,  397,  412, 
413. 

Izard,  Ralph,  I.  440,  522.    II.  20. 

Izdardi, .  II.  437,  438. 


Jackson  Gen.  Andrew,  Lktter  to  : 
11  October  1835,  IV.  384. 
Letter  prom  : 
8  June,  1814,111.404. 
A  commission  of  Brigadier  and  brevet 
of  Major-  General  ordered  in  be  sen! 
to  him,  III.  398.  See  loo,  401.  Incal- 
culable value  of  the  acquisitions 
made  by  Ids  heroic  successes,  7.  His 
proceedings  in  Florida,  117.  126,  127. 
A  candidate  for  (he  Presidency  ai  the 
Tenth  election,  541,  Secretary  Arm- 
strong's letter,  July  In  L81  I  :  lis  long 
delay  in  reaching  him.  588,  589. 
Mysterious  account  of  it.  596.  His 
letters  to  the  Secretary  of  War,  De- 
cember Mi,  1814,  and'  January  19, 
L815,  599.  Question  between  him  ami 
Southard.  599.  Expected  promptly 
and  publicly  to  correct,  an  injustice 
unconsciously  committed  by  him.  599, 
President  of  U.  S.  661.  iv.  86,  87. 
His  financial  project  condemned,  mi. 
Revolution  in  Ins  cabinet,  179.  In's- 
sent  from  his  views  as  to  a  Bank  of 
U.  S.,  and  a  substitute  for  it.  L83.  His 
Proclamation  December  II.  1832,  229, 
3,")G.  His  retention  of  the  band  Dill, 
March  4,  is:;:;.  299,  300.  However 
unwarrantable  the  removal  of  the  De- 
posites,  or  culpable  the  mode  of  effec- 


tuating if.  the  act  has  b<  en  adn 

by  -nine  of  his  leading  oppi nts,  to 

li:i\  e  been  not  a  usurpation,  as  charg- 
ed, but  an  abuse  only,  of  power,  355. 
Distinction  between  the  custody  and 
the  appropriation  of  the  public  mo- 
ney. 356,  367,  368.  His  inlormal  dis- 
avowal  of  the  obnoxious  meaning  put 
on  some  of  his  acts,  particularly  bis 
Proclamation,  356.  .M.  has  not  seen 
any  avowal  by  the  Presidenl  of  the 
odious  principle  that  offices  and  emol- 
uments are  the  spoils  of  rictory,  &c, 
356,  '■'>'>!■  His  popularity,  with  which 
his  unconstitutional  doctrines  are  arm- 
ed, is  evidently  and  rapidly  sinking 
under  tin.'  unpopularity  of  ins  doct- 
rines. Prediction,  357,  366,  367. 
His  Sixth  annual  Message,  December, 
1834.  lis  peremptory  tone  as  to  the 
French  Treaty,  374,     [See  [11.21,  rx 

21.  364,  365,  37:;,  mi.  mi.  ins.  418, 
596,  ti-<».] 

Jackson,  Francis  J..  Minister  from  G., 
B„  II.  453.  457,  459,  160,  165,  469 
470,  471,  474,  48.r>,  487,  499. 

Jackson,  James,  I.  451. 

.1  vckson,  John  G.,  Letter  to  : 
17  December,  1821,  111.  243. 

JACKSON,  William.  Elected  Secretary 
of  the  Federal  Convention.  I.  328. 

Jacobin  Societies,  J  I.  '■>'i .  39. 

James  River,  1.  118,  11!»,  120,  122.  124. 
175. 

.1  \mi:so\, ,  III.  25. 

Janus,  Temple  of.  IV.  472. 

Jarvis,  William,  Consul  at  Lisbon,  II. 
438,   173. 

Japan,  I II.  C5. 

Jay  John.  His  proposition  concerning 
the  Mississippi  River,  1.  248,  252  27.V 
Secretary  lor  Foreign  Affairs,  Reports 
a  view  of  infractions,  on  both  sides, 
of  the  Treaty  of  Peace,  276.  Likely 
to  lie  brought  into  view  for  the  Presi- 
dency, in  the  event  of  Washington's 
declining  a  re- election,  558.  Objec- 
tions to  him.  Believed  by  many  to 
entertain  monarchical  principles  :  by 
others   to    ha'-e   undiih  espoused    the 

claims  of  British  creditors,  and  among 
the  Western  People  especially  obnox- 
ious, on  account  of  his  negotiations 
for  ceding  the  Mississippi  to  Spain, 
558,  559.  [See  IV.  558  —  564.]  His 
judicial  opinion  on  (he  subject  of  the 
British  debts,  583.  Appointed  envoy 
to  G,  lb,  1  r.  11.  A  vulnerable  measure, 
on  account  of  his  Judiciary  character. 


J  E  K  ] 


G  E  N  E  II  A  L    I  X  D  i:  X 


623 


11,  12.  Animadversions  on  it,  14. 
Effects  ol  ii  mi  Legislation,  and  on 
Washington's  popularity,  L5.  His  hu- 
miliating memorial,  20.  Anticipa- 
tions concerning  his  mission  to  Eng- 
land, .'■'•.  30.  His  former  opinion  on 
the  Tax  on  carriages,  30.  Hi~  mission 
to  England.  The  measure  originated 
wholly  with  the  Executive,  IV.  197. 
Opposition  to  it  in  the  Senate,  not  to 
ilif  measure,  but  to  the  appointmenl 
of  the  Chief  Justice  to  the  service, 
•lii".  II.  K.  gave  no  opinion  on  the 
occasion.  497,  To  what  cause,  should 
it  succeed,  i  -  Buccess  ougbl  to  be  as- 
cribed,49S  502.  His  Treaty ,11. 34,37, 
39,  41,  13,  14.47  18  -59,  60,  61,  63, 
64,  65,  66,  i.T.  69,  70,  71,  72,  73,  75, 
76,  77.  81,  82,  86,  89,  93.  94,  97,  98. 
[See  ll.  39.  71).  99,  Ml.  in:;.  L22,  L23, 
129,  131,  135,  1  in.  L68,  lis.  201,  223, 
452,  515,  553,  554.  111.  5,  61,  297. 
298,  305,  Ml.  466,  482,  483.]  His 
former  pamphlet,  II.  45,  -17.  A  con- 
templated  candidate  for  the  Presiden- 
cy,^. His  Biography  in  Delaplaine's 
Repository.  111.  126.  IV.  115.  "A 
man  of  great  ability  and  perfect  rect- 
itude," 111.  297.  Misled  in  the  views 
lie  had  taken  of  the  course  pursued 
by  th."  French  Government  in  tin'  ne- 
gotiations l"i-  peace,  (1783),  IV.  83. 
[See  J.  39,  55,  1  in.  1  11.  228,  405,  408, 
419.  421,  437,  17^.  17H.  479,  484,  558, 
5115.] 

Jay,  Peter  A..  Letter  to  : 
J  1  August,  1833,  IV.  307. 

Jefferson,  TnoMAS,  Letters  to: 
13  December,   17so,  IV.  564 


1 1  February, 

1783, 

I.     (52 

Hi  March, 

1784, 

••      68 

25  April, 

•■ 

••      77 

15  May, 

II 

"      80 

3  July, 

" 

"      86 

20  August, 

ll 

"      90 

7  September 

" 

"     9!) 

15  September 

II 

"    101 

11  October, 

': 

"    102 

17  <  ►ctober, 

a 

"    104 

o  January, 

1785. 

<;    122 

27  April,  ' 

•• 

•«    145 

20  August, 

"    173 

:;  ( ictober, 

it 

'•    195 

15  November, 

" 

"    202 

22  January, 

1786, 

"    211 

IS  March,' 

" 

"    224 

12  May. 

ii 

••    230 

12  August. 

ii 

"    242 

4  December, 

" 

"    259 

15  February, 
;i  March, 

23  April, 
15  May, 

ii  June, 

I-  .Inly. 

0  Septemm  r. 

24  October, 

9  December, 
J!)  February, 

22  April, 
2  1  July, 

10  Angust, 

23  August, 

:'  1  September, 
8  October, 
17  October, 

8  I  lecember, 

12  December, 

29  March, 

9  May, 

23  May, 
27  May, 

13  June, 

30  June, 

24  January, 

-l  February, 

11  February, 
8  March, 

1  May, 

12  May. 

23  June, 
27  June, 

10  July, 

13  July. 

4  August, 
8  August, 

12  June. 

12  April, 
8  Mav. 

27  May, 

13  June, 

17  June, 

19  June, 
29  June, 

18  July, 
22  July, 
3ii  July, 

5  August. 

11  August, 

20  August, 
22  August, 
27  August. 

2  September, 
2  March, 

fl  March 

12  March, 
1 1  March, 

24  March, 


1787, 


17.ss. 


1789, 


17110, 


1791, 


1792, 
1793, 


1794,   II. 


272 
284 
319 
328 
330 
:;:;:; 

337 
343 
362 
376 
387 
404 
•107 
410 
117 
420 
421 
•111 
44G 
457 
465 
470 
471 
475 
47!) 
501 
503 
507 
511 
534 
535 
537 
537 
538 
539 
510 
541 
560 
576 
578 
579 
580 
583 
584 
585 
585 
586 
588 
590 
591 
593 
594 
595 
596 
1 
5 
6 
7 
8 


24 

GENERAL     I  NJD  E X . 

[  J  E  F  — 

26  March, 

1701, 

TT.        8 

5  May, 

179R. 

IT.    139 

31  March, 

9 

13  May. 

•• 

••     MO 

1  1  April, 

" 

"        10 

20  May, 

tt 

•      1  12 

28  April, 

a 

"     11 

27  May, 

11 

"     143 

9  May, 

" 

13 

:;  June, 

" 

••     114 

11  May, 

CI 

"     n 

L0  .1 

it 

■•      1  17 

25  May, 

" 

17 

29  December, 

•• 

"      149 

1  June, 

tt 

"       18 

12  January. 

1799, 

"     150 

Ki  June, 

a 

"       18 

s  February, 

••     151 

30  November. 

a 

"       21 

29  December, 

f . 

■■      L51 

21  December, 

" 

-       28 

-1  January, 

1800, 

••     153 

1 1  January, 

17!).-). 

"       31 

',)  January. 

" 

'<     154 

26  January, 

•• 

"       33 

12  January, 

" 

';     154 

15  February, 

it 

"      :•„-) 

18  January, 

it 

■•     [55 

23  March, 

tt 

"       38 

1  1  February, 

tt 

•'     156 

(i  August, 

u 

"       43 

15  March, 

a 

••      157 

24  August, 

" 

"       59 

1  April, 

" 

••     L58 

18  October, 

tt 

"       CO 

2u  April, 

a 

•     L59 

8  November, 

'• 

"        (il 

September 

" 

••     L61 

6  December, 

1795, 

"        62 

21  October, 

a 

••     162 

13  December, 

" 

"       63 

November 

it 

•■     1(11 

27  December, 

" 

"       69 

20  December, 

••      165 

10  January, 

1796, 

"       70 

10  January. 

1801, 

"     166 

31  January, 

ii 

"       75 

28  February, 

•• 

"     171 

7  February, 

" 

"       79 

7  January, 

1808, 

"     410 

21  February, 

" 

"       81 

19  March, 

1809, 

"     434 

29  February, 

" 

'•'       85 

28  .March, 

ti 

■•      136 

6  March, 

" 

"       86 

f)  April, 

a 

"     437 

13  March, 

a 

11       88 

21  April, 

" 

"     439 

4  April, 

" 

"       89 

1  May, 

li 

■■      lin 

11  April, 

tt 

"       94 

30  May, 

" 

"     442 

18  April, 

a 

"      96 

12  June, 

tt 

«      113 

23  April, 

" 

"      98 

20  June. 

n 

"     443 

9  May, 

a 

"     100 

27  June, 

it 

••     4  It 

10  May, 

it 

"       99 

4  July, 

11 

••       115 

22  May, 

tt 

"     103 

7  July, 

tt 

••      116 

30  May, 

" 

"     105 

2:;  July. 

it 

••     418 

5  December, 

" 

"     106 

3  August, 

" 

•■      149 

10  December, 

it 

"     107 

16  August, 

" 

••     451 

]9  December, 

" 

"     108 

2:;  August, 

11 

"     452 

25  December, 

i. 

"     109 

11  September 

"     453 

8  January, 

1797, 

"     110 

ii  ( October 

.< 

•'     457 

15  January, 

" 

"     111 

:ki  October, 

" 

•■     459 

22  January, 

it 

"     113 

1;  November 

11 

••     459 

29  January, 

tt 

"     114 

1 1  December, 

11 

••     160 

5  February, 

" 

"     115 

23  April. 

1810, 

••     472 

11   February, 

" 

"     116 

7  May, 

11 

•;     473 

5  August, 

11 

"     118 

25  May, 

(1 

"     477 

20  October, 

" 

"     119 

1  June, 

.. 

••     478 

25  December 

.( 

"     120 

15  June. 

11 

"     479 

21  January. 

1798, 

"     121 

22  June. 

" 

"     480 

12  February, 

a 

"     124 

17  July, 

11 

"     4S1 

February, 

•• 

"     126 

ii 

»     481 

1  March, 

tt 

"     128 

19  October, 

" 

"     484 

12  March, 

a 

"     130 

7  December, 

11 

"     489 

2  April, 

ii 

"     131 

IS  March, 

1811, 

"     490 

15  April, 

tt 

"     133 

1  April, 

11 

"     492 

22  April, 

tt 

"     137 

19  April, 

11 

"     493 

29  April, 

'• 

"     138 

3  May, 

tt 

"     507 

nr  —  jbf] 


(;  E  N  1:  R  a  L    i  x  i)  B  X  . 


625 


7  June,  1811,  II.  512 

8  July,  "  •'  613 
7  February,  1812,  "  .v.:. 
i;  March,  "  "  530 
:>  March,  -  "  530 
:;  April,            "  ••  530 

2  1  April.  "  •'  532 

25  May,  "  "  535 

12Juue,  "  "  536 

17  August,  "  ,;  542 

I  l  Octub<  r,         li        '•    ■ 

.7  January,  1813,  "  557 

10  March,  "  "  558 

U June  "  "  563 

111  Mav.  1814,  '• 

10  October,  "  -  588 

23  October,  "  "  590 
12  March.  1815,  "  600 
1.')  February,  1817,  III.  34 
12  February,  1819,  -  115 

(i  March.    '          ••  ';  126 

25  October,         "  "  148 

10  December,    1820,  '•  L96 

7  January,  1821,  "  202 
•2i)  September,  "  "  229 
10  November,      "  "  234 

5  March,  1822,    -    260 

5  January,       1823,  '"    291 

27  June    '  "  ••  323 

6  September,  "  "  336 
1  November,  "  "  341 

II  November,  "  "  343 

18  December,  "  "  353 
li  January,  1824,  "  3G0 
2ii  Mav.    '  "  "  439 

16  August,  "  "  4 17 
2o  September,  "  "  450 
31  December,  "  "  47  G 
15  Jauuary,  1825,  "  480 

8  February,  •'  "  481 

17  February,       "        "    4S3 

28  December,      "        "    oil 

24  February,  1826,  "  51d 
Governor  of  Virgiuia,  has  a  narrow 
escape  from  being  captured  by  Tarle- 
ton,  I.  46.  His  honorable  acquittal. 
58.  His  detention  at  Annapolis,  62. 
His  nephews,  us.  150,  220,  233,  333. 
443.  His  "  Notes  on  Virginia."  Im- 
portance "I'  publishing  them.  202. 
203,  211.  231.  HI.  461,  152,  5.12.  At- 
tempts in  bring  the  innu<  nee  of  his 
name  against  adopting  the  Federal 
Constitution,  1.  405.  His  wish  to  pass 
the  summer  of  17.su  in  I".  S.,  459. 
Obstacles  to  it,  471.  Leave  granted. 
479.  Suggestion  of  his  accepting  an 
appointment  at  home,  472.  His 
doubts  about  accepting  the  office  of 

VOL.    TV  40 


Secretary  of  State,  and  eminent  fit- 
Dess  for  it.  501.  Universal  anxiety 
for  his  acceptance,  502.  Examination 
of  his  doctrine,  that  one  generation 
of  men  has  no  righl  to  hind  another, 
50:;  5, in.  1  he  idea  of  limiting  the 
right  to  bind  posterity,  503  506. 
Germinating  under  the  extravagant 
doctrines  of  Burke,  534.  Frontis- 
piece of  Paine's  pamphlet,  ■'■'>■'>.  Sick, 
5.0.  His  Reporl  on  Weights  and 
Measures,  ~>'-^>.  Likelj  i>>  be  brought 
into  view  for  the  Presidency,  in  the 
event  id'  Washington's  declining  a  re- 
election. Objections:  Jefferson's  "ex- 
treme repugnance  to  public  life,  and 

anxiety  to  exchange  il  lor  his  farm 
and  his  philosophy."  Local  prejudi- 
ces in  the  Northern  Slates  against 
him,  with  the  views  of  Pennsylvania 
in  relation  to  the  seat  of  Government, 
558.  His  answer  to  Hammond.  Its 
ordeal  in  the  Cabinet,  560.  Strict- 
ures on  him,  in  relation  to  I'.  Fre- 
neati.  569.  Probability  of  his  res- 
ignation of  the  oilier  of  Secretary 
of  State,  573.  His  longings  for  the 
repose  of  Monticello,  579.  Urges 
Madison  to  reply  to  ••  PaciGcus,"  585, 
586.  His  ••  dreadful  "  and  distressing 
accounts  of  <  tenet's  conduct,  58G,  590. 
Desire  of  the  President  to  retain  J.  in 
office,  597.  Value  placed  on  his  par- 
ticipation in  the  Executive  counsels. 
Healing  tendency  of  his  policy,  598. 
In  raptures  with  a  performance  of 
John  Taylor  of  Caroline  Co.  Va.,  602. 
His  Commercial  Report,  H.  2.  His 
suggestion  respecting  a  Scientific 
body,  38.  His  ••  historical  task,"  80. 
fear  that  if  brought  out  for  the  Pres- 
idency, ••  be  will  mar  the  project,  and 
insure  the  adverse  election,  by  a  per- 
emptory and  public  protest,"  83. 
Hi.s  ••  patronage  or  attention,"  to 
Thomas  Paine,  91.  Doubl  whether 
the  Electors  will  leave  him  to  enjoy 
repose,  &c,  I  m''.  Semis  to  Madison 
an  unsealed  Letter  to  J.  Adams,  sub- 
ject 10  M's  discretion  as  to  delivering 
it,  113.  His  loiter  to  Mazzoi.  US.* 
A  malignant  Ac,  insinuation  against 
him   in  a    pamphlet,    119.     His   niis- 

*  In  Jefferson's  writings,  published  by  Con- 
grecs  ia  JS.">4,  is  a  "  Statement  from  memory 
of  a  letter  I  wrote  to  James  Madison:    copy 

omitted  to  be  retained,  Monticello,  January, 
1,  17t'7."  Alto  "Statement  from  memory 
of  a  letter  X  wrote  to  Jnhu  Adams,  copy 
omitted  to  be  retained."    IV.  153 — 156. 


G2C 


GENERAL    INDEX, 


[  J  ]•.       -       J  V.  F 


take  in  supposing  thai  a  declaration 
of  War  requires  two  thirds  of  the 
Legislature,  133.  His  advice  to  Mon- 
roe, I  17.  Discredited  suggestion  of 
^surprise  that  would  throw  him  out 
of  the  Presidency,  1C3.  His  "  affair  " 
with  .1.  W.,  181.  On  etiquette.  1!>7. 
His  unexceptionable  conduct  in  Miran- 
da's case,  220.  liis  periodical  head- 
aches, 221.  Suit:  against  him  in  the 
Batture  cai  e,  179.  iiis  Memoir  on  the 
B.  case,  531,532.  Proposed  sale  of 
his  Library  to  Congress',  588,  602. 
His  communications  on  I  inance,  588, 
590.  Conjecture  that  his  assent  to  (be 
Cumberland  road  bill  was  doubtingly 
or  hastily  given,  III.  55.  His  ap- 
proach to  his  "  octogenary  climac- 
teric, and  vigor  of  mind  and  bodj 
265.  The  author  of  tin'  Declaration 
of  Independence,  282.  When  Secre- 
tary of  Stale  driven  by  the  extrava- 
gance of  Genet  to  the  ground  of  the 
British  doctrine  on  the  principle  "free 
ships,  free  goods,''  L98.  lakes  no 
part  in  the  ensuing  Presidential  elec- 
tion, 301,  304,  305.  His  "  two  gener- 
al canons*'  respecting  a  precise  de- 
marcation of  the  boundary  between 
the  Federal  and  State  authorities,"1 
and  omission  of  Exceptions,  325. 
Preamble  to  the  Constitution  of  Vir- 
ginia, probably  drawn  from  his  funds. 
451.  452,  593.  694.  The  great  projec- 
tor and  mainspring  id'  the  Universitj 
of  Virginia,  470,  492.  lis  Tutelar} 
Genius,  517,  533.  His  expedient  of 
enacting  statutes  of  Congress  into 
Virginia  statutes,  513.  His  private:  lf- 
airs,517.  Piivate  friendship  and  polit- 
ical harmony  with  Madison,  518,  525. 
His  death.  525.  Eulogy,  525.  Sketch 
of  his  public  services,  writings,  1  abits 
of  study,  Ac.  533.  His  "masterly 
share,"  in  the  Revised  Code  of  Vir- 
ginia, 532.  580.  "Beccarian  illu- 
sions," .r>8().  His  administration  of 
the  Government  of  Virginia,  532. 
liis  letter  to  Major  11.  Lee,  533.  Hi- 
services  at  Anuapolis,  .'>'■'•'■'•■  Diplo- 
matic agencies  in  Europe,  ■'■'■>'■'•■  Rela- 
tion to  the  University  id'  Virginia,  533. 
General  habits  of  study,  533,  634, 
Knowledge  of  the  French,  Italian, 
Spanish,  and  Anglo  Saxon  Ian- 
and  of  J. aw.  Taste  for  the  fine  arts, 
miscellaneous  reading,  abiding  relish 
for  books,  greal  learning.  Ac.  535. 
"  History  of   the    Administration   of 


Mr.  J..''  f>3.r).  His  pecuniary  difficult- 
ies, and  their  causes.  Application  to 
the  Legislature  for  the  privilege  of  a, 
loii.  n  .  538,  539.  Failure  of  the  Lot- 
tery, 617,  618,  629.  Hi--  bust,  ."-17. 
594.  Particulars  respecting  hi-  per- 
son, 59  I.  His  strong  disapprobation 
of  the  existing  Tariff  and  its  threaten- 
ed increase.  574.  His  letter  to  .1.  Nor- 
vill  on  the  deceptive    end  licentious 

character  of  the  press.  605.  I  !  9 
His  remarks  misconstrued  in  Europe, 
t;is,  <;i!t.  Regarded  the  freedom  of 
the  press  as  an  essential  safeguard  to 
i\-,'r'  government,  Ms.  619,  629,  630. 
Affairs  of  his  estate  and  family,  '17. 
618.  < "  9.  Proposed  publication  of 
his  MSS.,  617,  018,  629.  Explanation 
of  anachronisms  in  his  letter,  I  lecem 
ber  26.  1825,  to  W.  B.  Gib  -.  IV.  :,.,. 
:!4.  Coi  .',<  ctural  explanation  of  a 
passage  in  it.  659,  6c0.  Unfair  ap- 
peals to  thai  letter,  7.  8,  9,  11.  His 
known  sanctions,  in  official  acts,  and 
piivate  correspondence,  to  a  power  in 
Congress  to  <  nc<  un  ge  manufai  I 
by  commercial  regulations,  til.  659. 
IV.  7.  8,  11.  Probable  extent  of  his 
association  in  the  preparation  of  the 
pi(  ce  entitled,  "  The  danger  not 
over,"  !.  5.  Misstated  by  W.  P.  Giles, 
as  making  the  State  <  !o\  en  ments  and 
the  Government  of  U.  S.  foreign  to 
each  other.  18.  His  letters  supple- 
menial  to  a  pamphlet.  Use  and 
abuse  of  his  authority,  34,  43.  His 
letters  to  Madison,  Monroe,  and  • 
rington,  ('.">.  "  Review,"  i  f  his  Cor- 
respondence, 69.  His  view  "  at  once 
original  and  profound,  id'  the  rela- 
tions between  one  generation  and 
another,"  69.  Neither  the  term  -  nul-, 
lifying  "  nor  "  nullification  "  nor  any 
equivalent  word  is  in  (he  Resolutions 
of  Kentucky  in  17!'s.  drawn  by  him. 
The  Resolutions  of  Ky.,  in  1789,  in 
which  the  Moid  ■•  nullification  "  ap- 
pears, were  not  drawn  h\  him,  Mb 
106,  l^'.  His  letter  to  V, .  C.  Nicho- 
las, r,  September  L799,  86,  87,  100, 
LI  9,  L99,  -111.  it.  His  letter  Nov.  17. 
L799,  to  Madison  er.closing'-a  copy  of 
the  draught  of  the  Kentucky  resolves." 
lis  differences  from  the  Kentucky  res- 
olutions of  both  17:  8,  and  17!  '.'.  fen- 
lain-  passages  employing  the  terms 
••  nullification,"  ami'  "  nullifying," 
which  passages  are  omitted  in  the  Ky. 
Resolutions    of    17'.S.    tin.      Sense 


}  k  ]•   —  JOE] 


G  1:  .V  ER  AL     END  E  X 


627 


In  which  be  used  the  term.  Tg  be 
gathered  from  his  language  In  the 
Resolutions  of  1798  and  elsewhere, 
as  in  his  letter  to  Giles,  25  December, 
1825,  and  hi*  letter  to  Cartwright, 
5  June  L824,  199,  200,  206,  207,  111. 
His  letter  to  Monroe,  11  Augusl  17m;, 
and  to  B.  Carrington,  l  August  1787, 
229,  285,  (assuming  the  righl  in  the 
old  Confederation  to  coerce  States  of 
the  ( lonfederacy.)  His  trip  in  1791 
to  the  borders  of  Canada,  III.  112, 
His  remark  on  a  hereditary  designa- 
tion of  the  Executive  chief  of  L.  S., 
112.  His  opinion  that  tbe  system, 
which  lefl  Louis  XVI.  on   the  throne 

of  France  was  an  eligible  i ommo- 

dation  to  the  then  stale  of  things,  111. 
Observations  on  passages  in  his  writ- 
I  the  Presidential  elec- 
tion before  II.  R.  in  1801,  and  the 
conducl  of  James  A.  Bayard,  151  — 
158.  Peculiarity  and  importance  of 
his  situation  during  the  critical  period 
of  lh«'  Presidential  contest  in  il.  1.'.. 
L">7.  IG3.  Passages  in  bis  writings 
concerning  Banks,  currency,  Ac. 
101.  Features  of  his  character,  175. 
Proposed  refutation  of  charges  against 
him,  2  17.  218.  His  habit,  as  of 
•others  of  great  genius,  of  express- 
ing in  strong  and  round  terms  im- 
pressions of  the  moment,"  218.  His 
Reports  as  Sccretai"j  of  State,  on  the 
Fisheries,  and  on  Foreign  Commeixe, 
and  Messages  as  P.  V.  S.,  inculcating 
the  policy  of  exercising  the  protective 
power,  without,  the  slightest  doubt  or 
its  Constitutionality,  248.  Two  letters 
from  him,  "containing  irrelative  para- 
graphs not  free  from  delicate  person 
alities,"  303.  His  letter  explaining 
the  age  of  a  generation,  303.  His 
letter."  March  15,  L789,  to  Madison, 
saying  that  the  Constitution  of  the  LL 
S.  "  forms  us  into  one  State,  as  to  cer- 
tain objects,"  Ac..  303,  320.  Letter 
1C  December  1786,  to  .Madison,  "to 
make  us  one  nation  as,  to  foreign 
concerns,  and  keep  us  distinct  in  do- 
mestic ones."  gives  the  outline  of  the 
proper  division  of  powers  between 
the  General  and  particular  Govern- 
ments. 320,  321.  His  Letter.  H;  Sep- 
tember 17S7.  to  Wythe.  Idea  of  a 
divided  sovereignty, 320.  His  Library, 
30.3.  [See  IV.  30G.  322.  336,  341,  365, 
421,564.]  In  his  letter  June.  17s7.  to 
Madison,  objects  to  give  Congress  a  ne- 


Law  s.  and  ad'.  0 
'■an  appeal  from  a.  Slate  judical  ore  lo  a 
Federal  Court,  in  all  cases.wbere  the 
acl  of  1  confederation  controls  the 
question,"  IV.  313.  [citing  Jefferson's 
Corr.,  Ac.  II.  lii:i.]  His  opinion 
of  Hie  ■■  Federalist,"  IV.  31  I.  315. 
Applies  the  term  "amalgamated,''  to 

the  Union  of  the  Stales:  and  the 
term  "  consolidated,v  to  the  Govern- 
ment, 3-t).  Toasl  lo  hi-  memory, 
sent  by  Madison  to  a  Fourth  of 
July  celebration,  3 II.  His  Letter  to 
Madison,  respecting  the  Va.  Resolu- 
tions of  1798  '99,  dated  Augusl  23. 
1799,  (printed  28,)  354.  Hi^  letter  to 
W.  C  Nicholas,  Sept.  .",.  L799,  354 
III.  Abuse,  by  the  nullifiers,  of  his 
authority,  410,  411.  Extract  firm  a 
paper  purporting  to  lie  his  original 
draught  of  the  Kentucky  Resolutions, 
411.  n.  [See  I.  43.  60,  98.  1  13,  157, 
loo.  343,  552,  555,  569.  II.  26,  :7,  46, 
60,  67.  74,  70.  .so.  K13,  107.  L08,  I  13, 
162.  170.  17.'..  3110.  585.  HI.  30.  10.  1  Is, 
175,  187.  231,  278,  304,  346,  I  Hi.  151, 
402.  526,531  -535,  543,  .V70.  584,588, 
593,  594,  000,  655.  IV.  Hi.  17,  30.  45, 
48,  70   St.  -ill,  243.] 

Jenifer, Daniki.,, A  commissioner  on  the 
pari  of  Maryland  for  settling  with  A  ir- 
ginia  the  navigation  and  jurisdi 
of  the  Potomac  below  tho  falls,  I.  1  18. 

Jenkins.  Sib  Leoijne,  Judge  of  the 
High  Court  of  Admiralty.  His  LV- 
porl  in  the  case  of  a  Swedish  vessel, 
which  had  carried  goods  from  on< 
enemy's  port  to  another,  and  was 
seized  after  discharging  those  goods, 
Ac,  A-c.  H.  326,  321. 

Jenkinson's,  [Robert Banks]  Collection 
of  Treaties,  IL  27:',.  277,  27S.  His 
Discourse  prefixed  to  it.  384.  His 
argument,  if  even  plausible,  with  no 
oilier  merit,  381. 

Jennings,  Robert  C.  Deputy  Commis- 
sary of  purchases,  HI.  410. 

Jesuits,  The,  III.  215. 

JesUP.  Cot..  Thomas  S..  His  confidential 
communication  concerning  a  Spanish 
invasion,  III.  22,  20. 

Jews,  III.  !)7.     Their  history,  170. 
■  John  Adams,"  The  Ship,  II.  461.  !7s 
470.  4su. 

Johnson,  Augustus,  pardoned,  HI.  20. 

Johnson,    Doctor,    His   Lexicography, 

III.  (ilO,    (il7,      ••  The    venom    of     ih, 
shaft  "  and  "  the   vigor  of  the   bow,' 

IV.  219. 


028 


( .  I :  N  E R A  L     INDEX 


[  J  0  II  —  JCD 


Johnson,  William,  Judge  of  tlio  U.S. 
S.  Court,  III.  291. 
Letter  to  him  : 

i;  Mas.  1825,  III.  489. 
His  Biography  of  Gen.  Greene,  293. 
1 13,  189.  Is  writing  a  Historical 
view  of  parties,  293,294.  Ascribes 
to  G.  Morris  tin-  Newburgb  Letters 
written  by  Armstrong,  324.  His  dis- 
cretion  ■•  not  always  awake,"  324. 
Dispute  with  Cooper,  324,  325. 

Johnson,  William  S.,  A  Senator  from 
<  lonnecticut,  1.  430,  1 12. 

Johnson,  Zachary,  [.387.  An  elector 
ofT.  and  V.  J'..  I.  457. 

Johnson,  Col..  III.  398. 

Johnson, ,  I.  508. 

Johnson,  Mr.,  IV.  L6. 

Johnson,  (  ?  Chapman,)  IV.  43. 

Johnstone,  Commodore,  His  capture  of 
five  Dutch  East  Indiamen,  I.  58. 

Jonathan  Bull  and  Mart  Bull,  An 
Apologue  occasioned  by  the  Missouri 
Question,  III.  249—256. 

Jones,  E.,  First  Clerk  in  the  Treasury 
Department,  II.  180. 

Jones,  Gabriel,  I.  387.  A  Judge  of 
the  District  Court  of  Virginia,  378. 

Jones,  Joseph,  Leti'ers  to  : 
25  November,  1780,  IV.  561 
5  December.     1780,  "     503 
I.    108.    Ill,    112,    113,   114,  131.  131. 
142,  145,  147,  159,  160,  203.  220,  238, 
250,  252.  2(12.     II.  2(1.     111.  L89.     Ap- 
pointed a  Judge  of  (lie  General  Couri 
of  Ya..  I.  498.     Attacks  E.  Randolph 
respecting  the  Proclamation  of  Neu- 
trality. 599. 

Jones,  Mr.,  II.  07,  74,  85. 

Jones,  Paul,  The  Ariel  commanded  by 
him  dismasted,  1.  40.  [See  I.  337.  3  1.",. 
357,  367.] 

Jones.  Skelton,  His.  and  Girardin's, 
Continuation  of  Burk's  History  of 
Virginia,  111.  205. 

Jones,  Dr.  Walter,  I.  562.  Appointed 
Commissioner  to  Annapolis.  -_:ic,.  217. 
223.  A  Delegate  to  the  Virginia  Con- 
vention. 387.     HI.  185. 

Jones,  Dr. ,  III.  596,  614. 

Jones,  Wiley,  I.  367. 

Jones.  William,  Letters  to  : 
April,  L814,    11.  581 
3  June.    1M4.  III.  402 
Secretary  of   the  Navy.  II.  565.     His 
prospective     resignation,     581,     582 
"  The  fittest   minister  who  had   ever 
been  charged  with  the  Navy  Depart- 


•'"•oi."  HI.  563.      [See  III.  389,   103, 

loi.    108,  122.  1:23.] 

Journals,  Legislative,  &c,  III.  548,  551, 

importance   of    preserviug  the 

original   Journals    of    a    Legislative 

body.  IV.  432,  433. 

Joy,  i  rEORGE,  Letters  to  : 

22  .May.  1807,     II.  404 

17  January,      1810,     "     465 
15  August,        1817,    III.     45 
21  November,  L821,     ••     z\\ 
lo  August,        L822,     ••     281 
9  September,  1834,    IV.  359 
Consul   ai    Rotterdam,    III.  45.      Hie 
desire  to  be  translated  io  Amsterdam, 
45.  46.    His  writings  during  the  Wat 
of  L812,  IV.  315.  310.  361,  362. 
Ji  dges.      [See  ■■  .-i  preme  <  !oi  m  ■.<  r. 
S."]    The  Judiciary  career,  Iii.  :;i7. 
Al  one  lime  the  bench  of  Justice  was 
perverted  into  a  rostrum  for  partisan 
harangues.  327. 

Judicial  Precedents,  IV.  ]-\.  185. 

Jddicj  vkv  Department.  [See  ■•  Su- 
preme Court  or  I'.  S."]  Importance 
of  an  independent  tenure  and  liberal 
salaries,  1.  179.  180.  Much  detail  to 
be  avoided  in  the  Constitutional  reg- 
ulation of  this  Department,  191. 
Court  of  Appeals,  L91,  192.  Effect 
of  the  want  of  a  provision  for  the 
case  of  a  disagreement  in  expounding 
the  Slate,  and  the  (old)  Federal  Con- 
stitution,  194.  The  national  suprem- 
acy should  be  extended  to  it.  289. 
The  oaths  of  the  Judges,  289.  Judi- 
ciary hill  of  the  Senate.  470.  485,  4s7. 

490.  191.  492.  193.  Its  offensive  vio- 
lations   of    Southern    jurisprudence, 

491.  E.  Randolph's  Report,  525. 
A  systematic  change  in  it  proper,  III. 
52.  Attempts  in  Convention  to  vest 
in  the  Judiciary  Department  a  qu 
negative  on  Legislative  hills.  56.  '  It> 
proceedings  should  touch  individuals 
onlj .  '.22.  The  Constitutional  resort 
for  determining  the  boundary  be- 
tween Federal  and  Slate  authorities, 
320.  327.  i'ee  509.  As  an  exposition 
of  the  power  of  Congress,  183.  De- 
pending modification  of  the  Federal 
Courts.    Difficulty  of  accommodating 

the  Judicial  Department  to  the  terri- 
torial extent  to  which  the  Legislative 
ami  Executive  may  he  carried  on  the 
Federal  principle,  523.  Why  the  Ju- 
dicial Department  will  engage  the  re- 
spect and  reliance  of  the  public  as 


JIN'  —  LAN] 


G E NERAL    I  N D E  X 


629 


the  surest  expositor  of  the  Constitu- 
tion. :is  well  iii  questions  within  its 
cognisance  concerning  the  boundaries 
between  the  several  Departments  of 
the  (>'>\  ei  omen  I ,  as  in  those  between 
the  Union  and  its  members,  IV.  350. 
[See  II.  479,  485.     III.  200,  219.] 

Junius.  Authorship  of  the  Letters  of 
Junius,  IV.  180. 

Jury  BUI.  II.  156. 

Jury  Trial,  I.  194.    II.  128. 

Justinian.  Comparative  insignificance 
of  his  Code,  without  the  comments 
and  decrees,  III.  G10. 


K. 

Keexe, ,  Agenl  for  land  jobbers  of 

New  Orleans,  II.  521. 

Keu.s.w.e,  Charles,  Letter  to  : 
October,  1817,  111.  49. 
[See  III.  102,  194,  195,  235,  264.] 

Kello,  ,  An  elector  of  P.  and  V. 

P.,  I.  157. 

Kennedy,  John-  F..  Letter  to  : 

7  July,  1834,  IV.  344. 
His  Discourse  on  the  Life  and  charac- 
ter of  Wirt,  IV.  344.    His  portrait  of 
Wirt  Dot  unworthy  of  the  pencil  of 
Wirt  himself.  345. 

Rennet,  Thomas  D.,  Letter  to  : 
18  March.  1809,  II.  432. 

Kentucky.  [See  "Virginia  "]  Con- 
vent ion  in.  I.  135.  Her  advances 
towards  an  independent  Government, 
142,  147,  154.  Interest  of  Virginia  to 
part  with  Kentucky.  Why  Congress 
ought  to  be  made  a  party  to  the  vol- 
untary dismemberment  of  a  State, 
157,  158.  Ideas  towards  a  Constitu- 
tion for  Ky.,  177 —  185.  Coldness  of 
members  from  that  district  on  the 
subject  of  an  immediate  separation, 
204.  Her  formal  application  for  in- 
dependence. Terms  of  separation, 
207.  208,  218.  Indian  wars,  233. 
Reported  unpopularity  of  the  scheme 
of  Independence.  233,  233,239.  Some 
of  the  leaders  known  to  favor  a  con- 
nexion with  Spain,  4(10.  Law  passed 
admitting  Ky.  as  a  State  of  the  Union, 
528,  530.  Coffee  trees.  583.  Vote  of 
Ky.  making  a  tie  between  Jefferson 
and  Burr,  for  the  Presidency,  II.  1G6. 
Proceedings  of  Virginia  in  reference 
to  the  separation  of  Ky.  into  an  Inde- 
pendent State,  III.  131,  132.  Appro- 
priations for  a  general  system  of  Fd- 


ucation,  276.     Sad   pi<  hire  of   Ky.. 

491.    Proceedings  occasi sd  by  the 

Alien  and  Sedition  laws,  C6] .  Hei 
Resolutions  of  1798,  '99,  [V.  J 17, 
199,  200.  [See  I.  255,  266,  388,  398, 
399,  427,  17::,  525.  527,560.  II.  456, 
570.      III.  11.       IV.  252.] 

Kerbt, ,  II.  204. 

Kercheval,  Samuel,  Letter  to  : 
7  September,  1829,  IV.  17. 

Kerr,  Mr.  III.  9. 

Key, ,  Professor,  III.  570,  571. 

King,  Rufus,  A  Delegate  from  Massa- 
chusetts to  the  Federal  Convention,  I. 
282.  Minister  to  London,  II.  105, 187. 
His  inflammatory  conduct  ;  general 
warfare  against  the  slaveholding 
States;  and  efforts  to  disparage  the 
securities  derived  from  the  Constitu- 
tion, III.  Ki!».  His  vindication  in  the 
Massachusetts  Convention  of  1788  of 
the  compound  rule  of  Representation, 
1(')9.  [Seel.  371,372,373,535,595, 
598.  II.  20,  86,  174,  175,  214.  III. 
550.     IV.  182.] 

King,  William,  Letter  to  : 
20  May.  1819,111.  131. 

King's  Mountain,  Faille  of,  III.  .",20. 

Kingston,  II.  580.  III.  390,  393.  396, 
404,  416,  420,  5G1. 

Kitchen  stoves,  II.  88. 

Knox.  Gen.  Henry,  I.  253.  421.  437, 
172.  477,  484,  554.  His  intended  res- 
ignation. II.  27.  29. 

Krantz, ,  III.  101. 


Labor.  The  great  mass  of  the  appro- 
priations of  labor  in  U.  S.  divisible 
into  three  portions,  IV.  2G4. 

Laborers,  IV.  28. 

Lacedemonians.  Infanticide  among 
them.  IV.  454. 

LakeChamplain,  III.  404.  413,  41G,  420, 
661. 

Lake  Erie,  III.  395.  403. 

Lake  Huron,  III.  395.  39G,  403. 

Lake  Michigan,  III.  395,  414. 

Lake  Ontario,  111.  39G,  401,  404,  413, 
41G,  451. 

Lake  Simroe.  III.  396. 

Lamp,  a  new,  invented,  I.  146. 

Lamprkm,  ■ ,  II.  37G. 

Land.  [See  "  Public  Land."]  Causes 
of  the  fall  in  the  price  of  lands,  III. 
G14,  G15.  The  quantity  of  cheap 
Western  land  in  the  market,  IV.  145. 
Depreciation  in  the  products  of  land 


630 


G  E  .VERAL     I  X  I)  i:  X 


[  L  A  N   —  I.  E  V. 


I  15.  A<  com  pared  with  machinery 
or  materials,  (ilti.  Future  reduction 
of  holders  of  land  to  a  minority,  24. 
Their  defensive  rights,  24,  25. 

Landsdown,  Mabquis  of,  [See  "  Shel- 
bubxe.  Lord,'-] 

Lank.  Col.  Samuel,  III.  20. 

Langdon,  John,  A  Senator  from  New 
Eampshire,  I.  439,  442,  462.  Govern 
or  of  N.  Hampshire,  III.  17"). 

Language.  [See  "English  Language."] 
Important  errors  produced  by  mere 
innovations  in  the  use  of  words  and 
phrases,  [II.  5 19,565.  Imperfection,  es- 
pecially when  terms  are  to  be  used,  the 
precise  imporl  of  which  has  not  been 
settled  by  a  long  course  of  applica- 
tion,565.  Difference  between  the  Latin 
and  English  idioms  in  the  collocation 
of  words,  IV.  279.  Difficulty  in  using 
a  foreign  language,  of  selecting  the 
appropriate  word  or  phrase  among 
those  (littering  in  the  shades  of  mean- 
ing, and  when  the  meaning  may  be 
essentially  varied  by  the  particular 
applications  of  them,  280.  The 
French  sense  of  "  qualified,"  289,  300. 
The  words  of  all  living  languages  to 
be  received,  not  in  their  changed 
sense,  but  in  their  sense  when  used. 
Illustration  from  the  ancient  phrase- 
ology Of  laws.  III.  4  12.  IV.  171. 
"Doubtlessly."  a  vicious  and  caco- 
phonous word.  III.  616,  <M7.  Scheme 
of  a  '•  National  Philological  Acade- 
my," 172.  Difficulties  of  modern  La- 
tinity,  208. 

Lansing,  John,  A  Delegate  from  N. 
York  to  the  Federal  Convention,  I. 
282.  His  mysterious  disappearance, 
IV.  182. 

"Last  Besort,  The"  respecting  the 
boundary  of  jurisdiction  between  the 
several  States  and  the  United  States, 
"  Ultima  ratio."  IV.  20.  13,  t«,  1!>, 
63,  6-1,  98,  101.  101,  2d."..  225,  319. 
[See  "  Constitution  or  F.  S.,"  "  Vir- 
ginia Resolutions,"  Ac] 

Latimer,  Henry,  II.  26,  :'>•">. 

Latimer,  Mi:..  IV.  155. 
Latinity.    [See  "  Language."] 

Latour,   Major    A.   Lacarriere,    His 

Historical  .Memoir  of  the  War  in 
WesI  Florida  and  Louisiana  in  IMI 
-'I."..  III.  .v.)!). 

Latrobe,  Bknjamin  IF,  Letter  to: 

2  1  .Inly,  L818.  HI.  100. 
Laubens,    IIiakv,    .V    Delegate    from 
South  Carolina  to  the   Federal    Con 


vention,    I.    282.        [See     III.     164, 

465.] 

Laussat,  Prefect  of ,  II.  182. 

LAW,  Thomas,  LeTTEB  TO  : 

27  .1; ary,   1S27.  111.  ."MS. 

Hi-  genius,  pbilantbropj  .  and  financi- 
al plan.  III.  289,  2'J0. 

Law.  Objection  to  a  notice  that  a  law 
would  not  lie  enforced,  [II.  21.  Im- 
portance of  certainty  in  law,  IN'.  184. 
Comparative  view  of  the  laws  of  F. 
S.  and  of  the  several  States,  III.  233. 
Profession  of  the  law.  IV.  383.  No 
branch  of  knowledge  which  may  not 
be  involved  in  legal  questions,  Ac. ,384. 

Lawler  wheat,  111.'  its.  110. 

Lawbence,  [  ?  Laubance,  ]  John.  IV. 
2  1  I. 

Lawbence,  Mi;..  I.  453.     III.  485. 

Lawson,  Robebt,  1.  387. 

Lawson's  History  of  North  Carotina, 
IV.  F.iO. 

Lea,  Isaac.  Letteb  to  : 
:;  April.  1828,    HI.  626. 

Learned  Institutions.  [See  "Educa- 
tion."] 

Lee,  Arthur,  [See  "  Franklin,  Doc- 
toe,"]  1.  149.  157,  356.  A  Commis- 
sioner to  treat  with  the  Indians,  I.  104, 
Fi.">.     His  election  to  ihe  Legislature: 

questions  of  residence  and    holding   a 

lucrative  office  under  Congress,  199, 
212. 

Lee.  Chables,  Attorney  General  F.  S. 
II.  ()".  7."..  si.  82.     [See  II.  si.] 
Fee.  Charles  Cabteb,  Letter  to  : 

May,  1831,  IV.  ISO. 
Fee,  Francis  Lightfoot,  I.  387. 
Fee,  Sir  G.,  IF  200. 
Lee,  Gen.  Henry.  Letters  to: 
13  April,  1790,     1.  515 

18  December.  1791,  "  513 
29  February,  171)2,  "  :>17 
12  February,       "         "  ."'17 

28  March,  '  "  "  .">■">  1 
15  April,              "         "  553 

A  Delegate  to  Congress,  I.  221. 
Dropped  from  the  Delegation,  254. 
Re-instated  by  an  almost  unanimous 
vol,',  262.  A  Delegate  to  the  Con- 
vention of  Virginia.  387.  His  fervor 
of  action,  136.  Governor  of  Virginia. 
Suggestion  of  a  military  appointment, 
548,553.  His  recommendation  of  P. 
Freneau  for  a  clerkship  in  the  Depart- 
ment of  Siate.  569,  A  contemplated 
candidate  for  the  Presidency,  II.  83. 
His  "brilliant  career  which  ranked 
him  among  the  most  distinguished  of 


LtK  —  L  E  S  ] 


G  EN  E  R  A  L     I  N  D  E  X  . 


G31 


our  Revolutionary  heroes,"  III.  137. 
His  •■  Memoirs  of  the  War  in  the 
Southern  Department  <>r  the  U.  S." 
439.  Suggested  the  movement  of 
the  Southern  army  from  Deep  River  to 
the  Sautee  in  1781,  180.  His  death, 
IV.  180,  Among  the  harshesl  censors 
of  the  policy  and  measures  of  the 
Federal  Governmenl  (luring  the  first 
term  of  Washington's  administration, 
306.  Madison's  correspondence  with 
him,  324,  341.  [See  L  21 1.  543,  569. 
IV.  306.] 

Lee,  Major  Henry,  Letters  to  : 
22  April,  1824,  ill.  437 

12  May,  "        "     439 

2.)  June.  "         "     441 

August,  "         "     448 

14  January,  1825,  «  478 
31  January,  "  "  480 
20  November,  "  "  505 
February,  1827,  "  559 
22  September,  "  "  589 
14  August,  1833,  IV.  306 
26  November,  "  "  324 
:;  March,  1834,     "     340 

His   "Campaign    of    '81,"'   III.    443. 
His    "  Observations"    on   Jefferson's 
Writings,  IV.  306.     [See  111.  533,  588, 
589,  590.     IV.  346.] 
Lee,  Li  dwell,  against  a  paper  emiss- 
ion in  Virginia,  I.  319.    [See  IV.  197.] 
Lee,  Richakd  Bland,  Letters  to: 
5  August,  1819,  111.  112 
20  April.      L825.    "    487 
A  Representative    from    Virginia    to 
the  firs!  Congress,  I.  453.  458.     11.  2(i. 
Commissioner  for  payment  of  proper- 
ty lost,  captured,  Ac  111.  22. 
Lee,  Mrs.  R.  I!..  HI.  487. 
Lee,  Richard  Henry,  Letters  to  : 
25  December,  17,-1.  I.  117 
7  Julj  .  1 7 85 ,  ••  157 

His  importance  in  the  Legislature  of 
Virginia.  I.  80.  His  election  as 
President  of  Congress,  117.  Union 
between  him  ami  R.  It.  Livingston 
on  the  appointment  of  Jefferson  to 
the  Court  of  Spain,  120,  121.  Against 
granting  to  Congress  a  general  and 
permanent  authority  lo  regulate  trade. 
197.  A  Senator  from  Virginia.  442. 
An  opponent  of  the  new  Constitution, 
445.  •'  Force  and  urgency  of  natural 
temper."  469.  Elected  as  a  Republi- 
can enemy  lo  an  Aristocratic  Consti- 
tution, -171.  Letter  of  himself  and 
colleague  to  the  Legislature  of  Vir- 
ginia, 4%,  497,  499,  500.      His  patri- 


otic zeal,  captivating  eloquence,  col- 
loquial gills,  and  polished  manners, 
III.  366.  I  lorrespondenca  with  bim, 
366,  367.  His  letters,  October  5. 
I7s7.  to  Presidenl  Adams,  and  Octo- 
ber J7.  l7i-7.  tu  Edmund  Randolph. 
Governor  of  Virginia,  IV.  i:;n.   131, 

[See    I.    87,   221.   251.   252.   251. 
356,  387.  -152.  461,  -172.  17  1.  57  1.     III. 
2i,:;.  2*2.  ;;:;7.] 

From  R.  II.  Lee  and  W.  Grayson,  to 
the  Legislature  of  Virginia,  I.  199. 

Lee.  Richard  Henry,  Letters  to: 
9  February,  1824,  III.  365 
11  March,   '       "       -     428 
22  February,  1830,  IV.     (ill 
Grandson  of  the  first  Richard  Henrv 
Lee,  IV.  11)7.  198. 

Lee,  Robert,  Letter  to  : 
22  February,  1830,  IV.  66. 

Lee,  Thomas  Lddwell,  Appointed  one 
of  the  Fievisors  of  the  laws  of  Virgin- 
ia.    His  death,  III.  580,  5!)  I. 

Lee,  Thomas  Sim,  Ex-Governor  of  Ma- 
ryland, I.  3G4. 

Lee, ,  Paymaster,  III.  389. 

Lee,  Col.,  I.  199. 

Lee,  Mi:.,  II.  528. 

Leeds,  Dike  of,  His  Letter  to  the 
Lord  Mayor  of  London  I.  526. 

Legislation.  Its  plastic  quality,  III. 
219. 

Legislativt  Department,  I.  185.  et  seq. 
Exclusions,  189.  Public  sentiment 
against  the  re-eligibility  of  members, 
after  accepting  offices  of  profit,  180. 
As  to  limits  of  power,  189.  [See  I. 
289,  290.]  A  double  preferable  to  a 
single  legislature.  III.  355,  356.  Elas- 
tic and  Protean  character  of  the  Leg- 
islative power,  IV.  343. 

Lb  Grand, ,  I.  147. 

Lehre,  Thomas,  Letteii   to  : 
2  August,  1828,  III.  035. 

Leigh,  Benjamin  Watkdns,  Letter  to: 
1  May.  1836,  IV.  432. 
His  letter  to  the  General  Assembly  of 
Virginia.  IV.  428.  His  Speech.  4  and 
5  April.  1836,  in  the  Senate  of  U.  S. 
on  the  Expunging  Resolutions,  432. 

Le  Maire,  Col.,  I.  145,  220.  225. 

Leonard,  Jonathan,  Letter  to  : 

28  April,  1*20.  IV.  38. 
His  "  History  of  Dedham,''  IV.  38. 

"  Leopard,  The"  Capture  of  two  offi- 
cers. Ac.  A  question  whether  or  not 
they  are  to  be  considered  as  prison- 
ers of  war.  II.  407. 

Le  Sueur,  Mr.,  HI.  37. 


G3i 


GENE  R A  L    I  N D E X 


[  1. 1:  v  —  l  o  o 


Lb  Vasseur,  Mr.,  TIT.  621.    IV.  40,  Gl. 
Lewis,  Joseph,  II.  181 
Lewis,  Nicholas,  I.  134. 
Lewis,  Robert,  Letter  to  : 

10  November,  1829,  lit.  472. 
Lewis,  S  imuel,  Letter  to  : 
Hi  February,  is:".",  IV.  30. 
Lewis,  Thomas,  I.  387. 
Lewis,  Warner,  Ah  elector  of  P.  and 

V.  P.,  1.457. 

Lewis,  Gen.  ,  III.  415,  41G. 

Lewis,    ,   Governor    of    New 

York,  II.  225.     [See  II.  4G0.] 
Lewis,  Mr.,  I.  422. 
Lewis, ,  II.  81,  84. 

LlANCOURT,      [  ?    E.    A.    F.    DUC    DE    LA 

Rochefoucauld,]  II.  63. 

Liberia,  An  appropriate  abode  for  the 
emigrants  pent  out  by  the  American 
Colonization  Society,  IV.  213,  276. 

Liberty.  Excess  of  liberty,  I.  4  15. 
Progress  of  the  cause  of  human  lib- 
erty in  Europe,  III.  18!).  IV.  60. 
Progress  of  Religious  liberty,  III. 
275,  27G.  General  struggle  between 
liberty  and  despotism,  IV.  193. 

''  Liberty  and  learning,"  IV.  38. 

Libraries,  III.  31G,  448,  450.  Appren- 
tices Library,  20.  Library  of  the 
New  York  Historical  Society,  IV. 
378.  Library  at  Philadelphia,  168. 
Library  of  the  University  of  Virginia, 
III.  507.  Plan  of  Free  Libraries, 
258.  Library  of  Alleghany  College, 
3G8. 

Licenses,  Belligerent,  II.  533. 

Lighthouses,  IV.  90,  91,  11G,  147,  148, 
400. 

Ltmosix,  Mk.,  I.  3G3. 

Linchpins,  Political,  IV.  196. 

Lincoln-,  Gen.  Benjamin,  His  success 
against  the  Massachusetts  insurgents, 
I.  278,  280,  282. 

Lincoln,  Levi,  Ex-Attornev  General 
of  U.  S.,  II.  485.  Declines*  the  office 
of  Associate  Justice  of  Supreme 
Court  of  U.  S.,  489. 

LlNNVKlS,  CHARLES,   I.  146. 

Linquet, ,  His  "  Observations  but 

I'ouvertnre,"  Ac,  III.  3G9. 
List,  Frederick,  Letter  to  : 
8  February,  182'.),  IV.  13. 
Listun,  Robert,  British  Minister  to  U. 

S..  11.  .V.).      His  "plot,"   120,    125. 

Litchfield,  ''Meeting  of  the  Republi- 
cans of  the  town  of  L.,,J  1 1.  435. 

Literature.    Its  advantages,  III.  448. 

Lithography,  A  new  and  promising  art. 
111.574. 


Little  &  Henry  :  Letter  to  : 

IS  October,  1821,  III.  23  I. 

Liverpool,  Earl  or,   [S Jenkinson, 

Robert  B.,"]  II.  530,  5:;:;. 
••  Living  generation."     lis  right  to  bind 
a  future  generation,  I. 
Livingston.  Brockholst,   a  judge  of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.,  IV.  1G3. 
Livingston,  Edward,  Letters  to  : 
10  July,  1822,  III.  27:; 

17  April.  1824,    ••     435 

27  December,  1825,     "     510 
8  May,  L830,  IV.     80 

2  August,  1834,  '•  346 
His  memorial  from  X.  Orleans.  U  la- 
boring to  trouble  the  waters  in  which 
he  means  to  fish,  II.  210.  His  pro- 
ceedings in  case  of  the  Batture,  479. 
His    penal  Code   for    Louisiana,  III. 

273,  510.      IV.  433.      His  S] eh   on 

Internal  Improvement,  III.  135.      Hia 
Speech  on  Foot's  Resolution,   IV.  so. 
268.      His  alleged  communication  to 
Jefferson,  respecting  the  Presidential 
election  in  1801,  151  —158.      Secreta- 
ry <»f  State,  179.      [See  li.  28,  34,  87, 
96,  101.     III.  434.] 
Livingston,  Robert  R.,  Letters  to: 
10  August,        1795,     II.     44 
7  February     1804,     ••    193 
5  July,  1805,     "     212 

Wishes  t<>  be  Secretary  lor  the  De- 
partment of  Finance,  I.  472.  Negoti- 
ation of  himself  ami  Monroe  lor  the 
purchase  of  Louisiana.  II.  184.  His 
correspondence  with  Monroe.  193, 
191.  Leave  for  his  return.  194.  His 
memorial.  20!).  Return  to  I".  S..  212. 
[See  1.  120.  405.  II.  43,  180,  183,  186, 
205.  IV.  200. J 
Livingston,    William,    Governor    of 

New  Jersey.  His  plan  of  a  prayer 
composed  wholly  of  texts  and  phrases 
of  scripture,  III.  307.  His  service  in 
the  Federal  Convention,  and  political 
opinions,  IV.  161,  162,  163.  A  trustee 
of  the  I  'ollege  of  New  Jersey.  A  lit- 
erary patriot,  163. 

Livingston,  William,  Jr.,  IV.  1G3. 

Lloyd,  T.,  His  "  Debates  of  Congress," 
111.  185.  IV.  244.  Very  defective 
and  abound  in  errors.  304,  364.  [See 
111.  642,  G55.     IV.  15.] 

Lobelia  inflata.  III.  15s. 

Locke,  John,  1.  592,  till.  III.  181.  Es- 
tablished an  immortal  Bystem,  IV. 
474. 

LOGAN,  a  Shawanese  Chief.  His  speech 
to  Lord  Dunmore,  I.  19. 


LOO  —  MCK] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


633 


Logan,  De.  George,  T.  577,586,589. 

His  agricultural  experiments,  II.  ill. 

His  proposed  visit  to  England,  408. 

470. 

Logic.    [Sec  ••  Definition."] 

Lomax.  John  Tayloe,  HI.  547.    IV. 

80. 

London,  111   102. 
London  University,  Til.  485. 

Long, ,  Professor,  111.  485,  59G, 

613.     IV.  35. 
Long's  History  of  Jamaica,  II.  258. 
Long  Point,  HI.  403. 
Longacre.  James  B.,  Letter  to  : 
27  August,  1833,  IN'.  307. 

Longchamps,  Case  of,  I.  106. 

;///.  Cases  of,  III.  493.  494,  029. 

Lottery,  license  for,  granted  by  the 
Legislature  of  Virginia,  for  the  en- 
couragement of  a  school,  I.  88.  Granl 
of  a  Lottery  to  Jefferson,  HI.  538, 
539,  617,  618,  629. 

Eons  XVI..  His  philanthropy,  T.  139. 
His  execution,  577.  [See  575.  IV. 
111.] 

Eons  XVI  IE.  Principle  implied  in 
his  restoration  by  the  allies,  III.  3. 
His  Speech  ami  the  principle  avowed 
in  it,  310,  32!).     [See  HL  14.] 

Louisiana.  Cession  to  France.  IE  174, 
182.  Delivery,  191.  Purchase  by  U. 
S.,  IE  183,  185,  ISO,  191.  IV.  171, 
200,  201.  Bill  providing  a  Gov- 
ernment for  Ea..  IE  194,  204.  Its  ad- 
vantages from  incorporation  with  U. 
S.,  U.  447.  Ground  of  the  temporary 
privilege  retained  by  the  ceding  party, 
distinguishing  between  its  ports  and 
others  of  U.  S.,  III.  153.  [See  HE 
156,  213,  275.]  Penal  Code  for  La., 
III.  273.  510.  Provision  for  Jeffer- 
son's daughter.  017,  629.     IV.  40. 

Lowndes,  William,  Letter  to  : 
16  October,  1816,  HI.  30. 
Declines  to  be  Secretary  of  War,  III. 
25,  29,  30. 

Lowndes,  Mr.,  I.  382. 

Lownes, ,  IE  89. 

Lucerne,  HI.  89. 

LupineUa  seed,  III.  40. 

Luther,  Martin,  III.  243. 

Luxury,  HI.  258,  265,  266. 

Luzerne,  A.  C,  Chevalier  de  la. 
Minister  from  France  to  TJ.  S.,  I.  309, 
540. 

Lycian  Confederacy.  I.  293,  294,  347. 

Lyman,  — -,  II.  494. 

Lynch,  D.,  Jr.  Letter  to  : 
27  June,  1817,  III.  42. 


Lynhaven  Bay,  TT.  564. 
Lyon,  Isaac  S.,  Letteh  to  : 

20  September.  1834,  [V.  364. 
Lyon,  Matthew,  II.  1-7.  158. 


M. 


Mably,    Gabriel    B.,  Abbe    de,    His 

"Etude  d'Histoire,"  I.  309,  315.    II. 

39. 

Machadash,  III.  403. 

Machine    to    supersede    the    common 

spinning  wheel,  [1809],  II.  II  I.  445. 
Machinery.    Effect,  on  laborers,  of  the 

sudden   introduction  of  labor-saving 

machinery,  III.  576. 
McArthdr,  Gen.  Duncan,  III.  383,  400, 

410. 

Mackinaw,  IE  547.    III.  561. 
Maclay,  Samuel,  II.  97. 
Maclay,    William,    a    Senator    from 

Pennsylvania,  I.  420. 

McClure, ,  III.  395. 

McClung,  Dr.  James,  A  Delegate  from 

Virginia  to  the  Federal   Convention, 

I.  320.*     Leaves  the  Convention  some 
time  before  its  adjournment.  354. 
Macon,  Nathaniel,  His  bill  IE  408. 
McCord,  ,  An  article  from  him  in 

the  Southern  Review,  I.  003. 
"  McCulloh    vs.    State    of   Maryland," 

(4  Wheaton's  B.  310,)  HI.  143.' 
McDonough,  Commodore  Thomas,  III. 

387. 

McDougal,  Gen. ,  III.  57. 

McDupfie,  George,  Letters,  to  : 
3  January,  1824,  III.  350 
30  March,      1830,  IV.     07 
8  May,  "        "       81 

His  Report  on  the  state  of  the  public 

finances,  III.  07. 

McGehee, ,  IE  150. 

McGregor, ,  III.  119. 

MgHenry, ,  Washington's  testimo- 
ny to  his  merits  and  talents.  I.  04. 

McHenry,  Dr. ,  I.  385. 

McHenry,  ,  Secretary  of  War,  IE 

80,  82. 
McIntire,  William,  IE  12. 
McIntosh,  Col.  John,  Letter  to  : 

28  October,  1809,  IE  458. 
Mcintosh  County,  IE  458. 
McIntosh,  Sir  James,  III.  438. 
McKean,  Thomas,  His  speeches  in  the 

Convention  of    Pennsylvania   on  the 

*  Appointed  to  fill  h  vacancy,  occasioned 
bv  succ  ssive  declining*  of  Henry  Nelson, 
and  R.  H.  Lee.      [See  Mad.  J'ap.  G43.J 


034 


G  i:  n  i:  RAL    INDEX 


[mck  —  MAD 


Constitution  of  lT.  P..  TIL  544.    Chief 
Justice  of  Pennsylvania,  IV.  412. 

McKee, .  HI.  398. 

McKenney,  Thomas  I...  Letters  to: 
2  Maj  ,  1825,   111.  487 

1  I  May,  -        "     490 

10  February,    1826,     -     515 
27  March,  "         "        "     522 
McLane,—     .  IV.  156. 
McLean,  John,  Letter  to  : 

2  February,  1824,  111.  :iG2. 
Postmaster  General  U.  S.,  363. 
■•  McLean's  paper,"  I.  538. 
McPherson,  Christopher,  II.  159. 

McRae,  Major, ,  III.  421. 

Madison.  Col.  James,  Letters  to  : 


23  July, 

1770, 

I. 

4 

9  October, 

1771, 

« 

4 

27  .hint', 

1770, 

" 

21 

March, 

1777, 

" 

28 

23  January, 

1778, 

" 

30 

0  .March. 

•• 

'< 

31 

8  December, 

1779, 

a 

32 

20  March, 

1780, 

" 

34 

1  August, 

1781, 

50 

12  February, 

J7.N2, 

" 

58 

30  March, 

" 

(< 

59 

1  January, 

1783, 

" 

CI 

12  February, 

•• 

" 

01 

27  May, 

t< 

" 

04 

5  June, 

it 

<. 

05 

5  June, 

1784, 

" 

81 

27  November 

•' 

<< 

112 

I  November 

1786, 

" 

254 

16  November 

" 

a 

257 

24  November 

'< 

a 

257 

12  December, 

" 

" 

265 

25  February, 

1787, 

" 

280 

1  April, 

" 

it 

280 

27  May. 

" 

" 

329 

28  July. 

a 

" 

335 

4  September 

a 

<< 

336 

30  September 

7 

" 

34  1 

20  June, 

1788, 

(< 

400 

27  July, 

•' 

" 

400 

5  July. 

1789, 

a 

185 

2:;  January, 

1791, 

" 

527 

13  February, 

u 

529 

19  May, 

1791, 

II 

10 

lis  certificates 

.  1.  529. 

II 

is  advanced 

ge  and  declining  stat< 

.  ii.  k;9.    His 

death.  February  27,  1801,  171. 
MADISON,  JAMES, 
[See  ••  Index  to  Letters  "  at  the  end 
of   each  volume;    "Memorandum  or 

LEADING     DATES,"   &C,    I.   Xli.        xliii.  ; 

it  passim.]  A  studenl  at  Princeton 
College.  Remarks  concerning  morals, 
conduct,  reading,  &c,  1.  1-  5.  0,  11. 


Copy,  anion?  his  papers,  of  the  Dec- 
laration of  Rights,  as  reported  by  .he 
select  Committee  of  the  Virginia  <  !on- 
\ ention  of  i77o.  21 .  A  ••  plan  of 
Government  for  Virginia,"  found 
among  his  papers,  24  28.  His  Es- 
say on  Money,  IV.  loo.  I1U  Draught 
of  instructions  to  Franklin  and  .lay. 

i' terning  the  free  navigation  of  the 

Mississippi,  &c,  441  -117.  His  sum- 
mary of  military  events  in  Virginia, 
Ac  in  a  letter  to  P.  Mazzei,  I.  44  — 
50.  His  Draught  of  an  Address  of 
Congress  to  the  Slates.  IV.  448  153. 
His  progress  in  a  course  of  reading 
retarded,  Li66.  His  opinion  on  the 
demand  made  by  the  Executive  of 
South  Carolina,  of  a  citizen  of  Vir- 
ginia, 66,  07.  68,  70.  77.  His  remarks 
on  certain  questions  arising  in  the 
Continental  Congress,  69  -72.  His 
interrogatories,  as  to  certain  subjects 
of  political  action  79.  Notes  of  his 
speech  in  the  House  of  Delegates  of 
Virginia,  in  support  of  a  proposition 
for  a  Convention  to  revise  the  <  ionsti- 

tution  of  the  State,  82,  83.  His  prop- 
osition on  the  subject  of  British  Debts, 

83 — 85.  His  remarks  on  the  political 
merits  of  Thomas  Paine.  J-7.  Ap- 
pointed one  of  four  Commissioners  to 
Maryland  for  establishing  regulations 
for  the  Potomac.  89.  His  opinion  in 
favor  of  appropriating  the  Slave  tax 
to  Congress.  89.  His  remarks  on  ob- 
jections to  restraining  foreign  trade 
to  enumerated  ports,  '.Ml.  His  project- 
ed trip  to  Fort  Schuyler,  Jul.  His 
return,  102.  Notes  id'  his  speech  in 
the  II.  ef  Delegates  of  Virginia  at  the 
autumnal  session  of  1784,  against  the 
General  Assessment  bill  for  support 
of  Religious  teachers.  110.  J 17.  His 
course  of  reading.  Not  determined 
to  make  the  law  his  profession.  Wish- 
es to  depend  as  Utile  as  possible  on 
the  labor  of  slaves.  His  projects  of 
speculation  and  travel,  161.  His 
••Memorial  ami  Remonstrance"  to 
the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia, 
against  "  A  bill  establishing  a  provis- 
ion lor  teachers  of  the  Christian  Re- 
ligion," 162  169.  Origin  and  hisio- 
ry  of  the  Memorial,  HI.  525.  526,  0H0. 
Withdrawn  from  nomination.  Ac 
1.  J70.  His  plan  of  a  Consti- 
tution for  Kentucky.  177  185.  His 
remarks  on  Mr.  Jefferson's  draught 
of  a  Constitution  for  Virginia.  Ib5  — 


M  A  D  —  M  A  I)  ] 


G  B  N  El  R  A  L     I  N  0  E  X 


635 


195.  TIN  journey  in  1785,  195.  Vis- 
it to  Mount  Vernon,  198.  flutes  of 
his  Speech,  in  !  785,  on  the  question 
of  vesting  in  Congress  the  general 
power  of  regulating  commerce  for  all 
the  States,  201,  202.  Consulted  by 
Washington  its  to  the  public  objects 
to  which  the  gift  of  Virginia  to  him 
should  be  applied,  214.  Appointed 
Commissioner  t<>  Annapolis,  216. 
Proposed  journey  in  1786,238.  Hide 
through  \  irgini  i.  Mai  \  land  and 
Pennsylvania,  1:42.  Embarrassment 
of  his  personal  situation  as  to  the 
Mississippi  question,  247.  Elected  to 
Congress,  262  A  Delegate  to  the 
Convention  of  1787,275.  His  com- 
parison of  temporizing  with  radical 
measures,  286.  Is  taking  notes  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  Federal  Conven- 
tion, 333,  334.  A  candidate  for  the 
Convention  in  Virginia,  :;7!».  One  of 
the  writers  of  the  "  Federalist,"  360. 
Efforts  on  behalf  <.r  the  Federal  Con 
Stitution.  385.  Vote  for  him  as  a 
Senator  from  Virginia.  A  candidate 
for  II.  !>..  138.  His  election  defeated 
by  Henry,  444.  A  candidate  for  II. 
U..  438.   1 1:;.    Contest  with   Monroe, 

449.  458.  Aversion  from  appearance 
of  electionering,  439,  I  id.  444.  Mis- 
representation of  his  opinions  respect- 
ing  the   <  Constitution,   446,  4  17,   449, 

450.  Elected  to  the  II.  of  I.'..  450. 
Takes  his  seat,  [.March.  I  1.  1789.]  ]. 
4o.'3.  [See  "Congress,"  &c]  Per- 
sonal objection  to  presenting  a  cer- 
tain Pet i  1  ion  concerning  slavery.  542. 
His  interview  with  President  Wash- 
ington, May  !•").  1792,  on  the  subjeel 
of  W.'s  intended  retirement  from  pub- 
lic life.  M.'s  arguments  against  it. 
554 — j.")!».  His  answer  to  questions 
as  to  mode  and  time,  of  Washington's 
announcing  his  purpose  of  retiring, 
and  draught  of  a  valedictory  address 
following  the  prescribed  outline. 
Hrges  a  reconsideration  of  the  pur- 
pose, 563  -  568.  [See  111.  :;::',.  32  l. 
IV.  115.]  Motives  lor  wishing  Fre- 
neau  to  establish  a  press  at  Philadel- 
phia, 569,  570.  Motives  for  not  meet- 
ing with  a  note  under  his  own  signa- 
ture, a  publication  on  this  subject. 
570.  Anonymous  pamphlet,  libelling 
himself  and  others,  571.  Essays.  Ac. 
published  in  Freneau's  National  Ga- 
zette in  1791,  1792.  IV.  454  —  484. 
Answers  a  letter  from  the  French  Min- 


ister of  the  Interior,  I    580.     A  sub- 
ject recommended  .0  his  attention   by 
Jeffet.son,  585,  >86.    Difficulties  in  the 
way  of  discussing  it.     Particulars  de- 
Bired  lor  information,  though  all  may 
not   lie  used,   587,588.     Forces  him- 
Belf  into  the  task  of  a  reply 'to  "  Pa- 
cificus."      Its  vexations.       foreknows 
that   he  •'  must    return  to  the  charge 
in  order  to  prevent  a  triumph  without 
a    victory."    588,     589.       Desires    to 
know  the  President's  ideas  on  certain 
points,   589.     finds   it    necessary  to 
abridge   the   reply  [" Helvidius,"]  to 
Pacificus.      Meaning   of    the   Treaty, 
and     the     obligations    of     gratitude. 
Desires   to   avoid   those   topics.  591. 
Requests  Jefferson's  critical  examina- 
tion. &c.,592,  593.     Particular  topics, 
593.     Additional  Nos.  of  "Helvidius." 
Apology    lor   an    error   of    fact.   594. 
Must    resume   the   task    in   relation' to 
the  Treaty  and  gratitude,  599.  ••  Ideas 
sketched   on    the   first   rumor  of   the 
war     between     the    Executive    and 
Genet  ;     and    particularly   suggested 
by   the  Richmond  Resolutions,  as  a 
groundwork    for    those    who     might 
take   the  lead  in  eouniv  meetings," 
."»!I7.  599  —  601.     His  answer  to  Presi- 
dent Washington's  questions,  caused 
by    the    existence   of    a    malignant 
fever  at  Philadelphia,  as  to  the  meet- 
ing of  Congress.  (iU2  —  (10.3.    Draught 
of  a    notification   recommending  that 
Congress  should  assemble  elsewhere, 
(ilk).     His  feelings  towards  Washing- 
ton.     '-The  present  Chief  Magistrate 
has  not  a  fellow  citizen  who  is  pene- 
trated  with    deeper   respect   lor   his 
merits,    or    feels    a    purer    solicitude 
for  his  glory,"  011,  612.      His  Reso- 
lutions founded  on  Jefferson's  Com- 
mercial Resolutions,    II.    2.    12.     At- 
tacks   on    him,    2.      A    member   of  a 
Committee  for   preparing  answer   of 
H.  R.  to  President's  Speech,  lit.    His 
answer  to  Jefferson's    suggestion   of 
a  wish  to  see  him  in  ••  a  more  splen- 
did   and    a    more    efficacious    post," 
than  his  present  one,  88.      His  sug- 
gestion to  a  memorialist  for  impeach- 
ing   the    Senate,    68.      His    "Politi- 
cal Observations,"  74.  IV.  485  —  505. 
Vindicates     the     Commercial     Reso- 
lutions   offered    by  him    at   the   first 
session     of     the      Third      Congress, 
486  —  502.      His  part  in  the  Debate 
on  the  President's  Message  refusing 


636 


GENERAL     INDEX. 


[   \I  A  D  —  M  A  D 


papers.  07.  Ad\ 'ises  Jefferson  to  rec- 
oncile himself  "  to  the  secondary. 
as  well  as  the  primary,  station,  if 
that  should  be  his  lot,"  107,  108. 
His  reasons  for  suspending  the  deliv- 
ery of  a  letter  from  Jefferson  to  J. 
Adams,  III.  112.  Describes  as  "pure 
fiction  "  a  rumor  that  he  was  to  go  to 
France  as  "  Envoy,"  Ac.  1 11.  De- 
clines answering  "  Marcellus,"  136. 
Advice  to  Monroe,  146.  Sends  "a  few 
observations  on  a  subject  which  we 
have  frequently  talked  of,"  1  ">0.  Vin- 
dicates the  Resolutions  of  Virginia, 
against  the  Alien  and  Sedition  laws. 
151,  153.  View  of  President  Adams's 
duty,  in  the  contingency  of  an  attempt 
to  smuggle  into  the  Chief  Magistracy 
the  choice  of  a  faction,  166,  107. 
Suggestion  of  the  course  proper  to  be 
pursued,  on  the  supposition  of  an  in- 
terregnum in  the  Executive,  or  of  a 
surreptitious  intrusion  into  it,  107. 
Waiver  of  an  invitation  to  hold  office, 
109,  170.  Questions  as  to  the  qualifi- 
cations of  a  friend  of  Monroe  for  of- 
fice, 170.  Outline  of  conversations 
with  Merry.  Minister  from  G.  B..  190, 
191.  Views  on  a  case  of  etiquette, 
L95,  196.  Recalls  a  pamphlet  on  the 
principle  in  question  between  IT.  S. 
sind  G.  B.,  216.  Weight  of  business. 
221.  His  memoir  containing  an  ex- 
amination of  the  British  doctrine 
which  subjects  to  capture  a  neutral 
trade  not  open  in  time  of  peace.  226 
—  391.  Negotiations  with  G.  11.  Rose, 
special  Minister,  &c.,  from  G.  B.  to  U. 
8..  411—421.  Infirm  health.  &c.  423. 
Application  to  Jefferson  for  the  letter 
of  credence  to  Short  as  Minister  to 
Russia,  445  440.  Necessity  of  his 
immediate  Return  to  Washington, 
450.  Memorandum  as  to  K.  Smith, 
495—500.  [See  II.  492.]  Negative 
on  a  bill  granting  Public  land  to  cer- 
tain Baptist  churches,  II.  511.  Pe- 
riodical billious  affection,  540,  544, 
569.  Talk  "  to  the  Deputies  of  sev- 
eral Indian  tribes  who  accompanied 
General  Clarke  to  Washington  in 
1812."  553  —  556.  III.  408,  490. 
Repels  the  charge  against  his  admin- 
istration of  views  "to  an  alliance 
with  France,  and  a  systematic  exclu- 
sion of  commercee,"  II.  560,  561. 
His  Message,  declining  to  confer 
With  a  committee  of  the  Senate  on 
the   subject    of    a    nomination,    505. 


Changes  in  bis  cabinet,  557,  589.  His 
letter  to  Monroe  on  the  return  of  Na- 
poleon from  Elba,  609  612.  Reserve 
with  which  he  receives  an  interposi- 
tion   respecting  an   appointment  to 

office,  UI.,5.  Instruction-  to  the  Na- 
vy Department,  10.  Letter  to  the 
Dey  of  Algiers,  15  —  17.  Declines 
corresponding  on  religious  subjects, 

19.  Leaves  to  the  Beads  of  Depart- 
ments the  selection  of  their  own 
clerks.  26.  Opinion  of  Monroe.  32. 
On  A.  J.  Dallas,  33.  Accepts  a  Dedi- 
cation of  his  Biography,  Ac  :;7.  An- 
swer to  tht;  valedictory  address  <>f  the 
Legislature  of  Virginia  on  his  retire- 
ment from  public  life.  IV.  557.  On 
specie  circulation.  III.  33.  Elect- 
ed a  member  of  the  "  American  Soci- 
ety for  the  encouragement  of  domes- 
tic manufactures,"  42.  Reluctance 
to  say  any  thing  about  candidates 
for  office,  47.  Expressions  of  good 
will  toward  certain  persons.  Acl.VIO. 
17.  184,  187,  192.  224.  296,  433.  Bia 
••private  papers."  58.  Bis  Address 
to  the  Agricultural  Society  of  Albe- 
marle, Va..  03 — 95.  Statement  as  to 
an  assertion  of  John  Randolph,  104. 
Habit  of  a  guarded  construction  of 
Constitutional  powers,  169.  Consents 
to  the  publication  of  his  correspond- 
ence with  D.  I).  Tompkins.  173,174. 
Corrects  an  error  in  the  printed  Jour- 
nal of  the  Federal  Convention, 
which  ascribes  to  him  a  proposition 
made  by  G.  Mason,  for  making  a  coun- 
cil of  six  members  a  pari  of  the  Ex- 
ecutive branch  of  the  Government, 
170.  Declines  recommending  a  can- 
didate for  election.  182.  Though  not 
approving  altogether  a  Bankrupt  sys- 
tem, he  would  desire  modifications 
which  he  has  no  reason  to  believe 
would  be  adopted.  204.  Is  digesting, 
for  future  use,  the  mosl  material 
parts  of  his  papers  and  letters,  224, 
225,  243,  308,  4  19.  549,  550,  604  In- 
willing  that  publicity  should  be  given 
to  his  communications.  Ac..  227.  315, 
335,  336,  343,  300.  362,  479.  600.  IV. 
11,  84,  86,  168,  187,  198,  337,  359, 
362,  380.  Intended  future  publica- 
tion of  his  view  of  the  Proceedings 
of  the  Federal  Convention.  228,  229. 
243.  IV.  107.  Caution,  when  I'.  I". 
S.,  in  issuing  Proclamations  of  Fasts 
and  Festivals.  HI.  275.  Interest  in 
the  destinies  of  Kentucky,   270,   27  7. 


M  A  D  —  >.    AD] 


GEN  ]■]  It  A  L     INDEX 


037 


Circular  io  the  Agricultural  Societies 
of   Virginia,  284-    287.    Corrects  an 
ei  roneous  supposition    thai  be  is  pre 
paring  a  work    embracing  a  historical 
view  of  parlies.  '293.    Takes  no  pari 
in  measures  relating  to  the  ensuing 
Presidential  election,  301.     Dnfonnd. 
ed   rumor  of  his    being   engaged   in 
writing  the  political  History  of  U.  S.. 
308.    'ilis  materials   for  it,   IV.  45. 
lias  not   in  view  a   history   of   any 
sort.  L83.     Answers  l<>  Queries  from 
Liverpool,  transmitted  by  .Morse.  111. 
313,  31 1.  315.    Sketch  of  a  substitute 
for  the  existing  Constitutional  mode 
of   electing    P.  and    V.  P.,  335.     His 
practice  respecting  calumnies  against 
him,  341,  342.       Delicacy   as    to   imli- 
viduals  in  authorizing  withoul  previ- 
ous   inspection,   the   publication    of 
letters  written   at   times  of  political 
excitement,  366.    [See  428.]    Reviews 
a  statement  attributed  to  Gen.  John 
Armstrong,  371       385.    Appendix  of 
illustrative     documents,    386       426. 
Calls  lor  Cabinet  meetings,  402,  403, 
nil.    Calls  on  the  Secretary  of  War 
for  Documents,  Reports,  Ac.  ami  in- 
structions.   4ol.    405,   -HI!).   412,    ll.">. 
•Hi;.  418,  119,  121.  422.  120.    Answers 
to  questions  respecting  the  effect  of 
settlements  made  by  the  accountant 
of  the  War   Department,  and  of  the 
authority  of  that,  officer  to  withhold 
liis  counter  signature  to  warrauts  lor 
moneys    on    account,    40!).    410.4  11. 
Notes  on  a  Militia   plan,  411.     View 
of  the  relations  of  the   Heads  of  De- 
partments   to    the   President  of  U.  S., 
417.   418.      Memorandum  respecting 
the  Battle  ol  Bladensburg,  422  —  424. 
Memorandum   of  an   interview  with 
Gen.    Armstrong,   Secretary  of  War, 
42  1.  425,  12ii.    Corrects  an  erroneous 
inference     from     one   of     bis     mess- 
ages    as     to      the      Federal      power 
concerning  Canals,  4.'iG,  437.     His  lit- 
erary authorship,  449.     Re-appointed 
a  visitor  of   the  University  of    Va., 
484.      "Chronological    sympathies" 
with  an  old  man,  493.    Resignation 
of  the   Presidency  of  the  Albemarle 
Agricultural    Society.  499,  500.     An- 
swers   to    questions    as   to    the  course 
which,  in  an  existing  state  of  things, 
it  becomes  Virginia  to  pursue,  507  — 
51ii.     Protests  and  Instructions.  508, 
500.51s.      Pecuniary    circumstances. 
,517.     Long  period  of  private  friend- 


ship   and    political     harmony    with 
Jefferson,    518.      [See     l\ .    To,    71, 
435.]      His    Sketch     of    the    public 
services.  Ac.  of  Jefferson,  III.  532  — 
5:;.">.     Defence  ugainst  the  charge  of 
inconsistency  respecting  a  Bank  of  P. 
S.,  542.      [See  IV.  L66.]     in   1827,  he 
ami  another  the  only  survivors  of  the 
[{evolutionary  •  longress  :   and  he  and 
two  others  of  the  signers  of  the  Con- 
stitution, 5511.       [See  IV.  182.]       Cor- 
respondence  with   General   Washing- 
ton, ill.  582,  583.       IV.  68.      Agency 
in  bringing  ubont  the  Convention  of 
17s7.  III.  586,  587.     His    proposition, 
offered   by  Tyler,  inviting  the   other 
States   to  concur  with   Virginia  in  a 
<  lonvention  of  Deputies  commissioned 
to  devise  and  report  a  uniform  sys- 
tem  of   commercial   regulations,   587. 
Corrects   a  statement   in  the  Lynch- 
burg Virginian  of  remarks  attributed 
to    him,   respecting   the    Legislature 
and  Governor  of  Va..  590,591,592, 
593.     Declines    to    answer    interroga- 
tories   through    the     press,    Ac,    000. 
Disapproves  the  project  of  bringing 
about  a  meeting  of  Deputies  at  Rich- 
mond,   (iOl.       Erroneous   supposition 
that,  his  retirement  from   public    serv- 
ice is  a  leisure.  Ac..  603,  col.      With- 
drawn from  party  agitation,  IV .  ;;:>:>, 
356.    Determination  not  to  he  enlisted 
in  a  party  service,  HI.  603.    Appoint- 
ed   a     Presidential    elector,    and   de- 
clines serving,  IIP!,  (120,  022,  623,  024, 
625.     "  Dehorlalion   from    the  violent 
manner  in  which  the  contest  is  carried 
on,''   02:'.,   020.     Dissatisfaction   with 
the  proceeding  of  putting  him  on  the 
ticket  and  with    the  delay  in  giving 
notice  of  it.  028,  024.      Is   "  putting 
into    final    arrangement  the  letters  of 
his  correspondents,"  632.     His  letters 
to  .1.  < '.  Cabell  on  the  constitutionality 
of  a  protective  Tariff.  636,  047.  048, 
<::>*.  663,  664.      IV.  5,  0,  7.  !),  10,  17, 
144,  2:12,  243,  24S,  259.       Cross   mis- 
statements, strange  misconstructions, 
and  sophistical  comments,  applied  to 
them,  lib  35.     Not   associated    in    the 
preparation    of    the    piece    entitled 
'•The   danger   not   over,"  4,  9.     Slip 
of  the  pen  in  using  the  word  ••trade" 
instead   of    "  Commerce."'  !),  10.      Is 
contracting  his  subscriptions  of  every 
sort,  12.     His  Speech  in  the  Conven- 
tion of  1787,  21,  22.     His  "  Notes  on 
Suffrage,    written    at   different    peri- 


638 


GENERAL     INDEX 


[  If  A  T<  —  M  A  D 


ods  after  his  retiremenl  from  public 
life,"  -1  ■  30.  Accepts  appointment 
as  ;t  Delegate  to  the  Convention  for 
amending  the  Constitution  of  Virgin- 
ia, 36,  37.  Offers  a  place  among  his 
political  papers  to  authentic  facts  in 
T.  S.  Hinde's  possession  respecting 
Burr's  criminal  enterprise,  45.  His 
Speech  in  the  Virginia  State  Conven- 
tion of  1829  -  '30,  nil  the  question 
of  the  ratio  of  representation  in  t  In* 
two  branches  of  t lit*  Legislature,  51 
55.  His  distrust  of  himself  as  an 
octogenarian,  (i(i.  164,  172.  Distrust- 
ed on  that  acconnl  by  the  Nnllifiers, 
who  rely  on  opinions  of  Jefferson. 
and  Sumter,  expressed  when  both 
were  older,  207.  [See  iv.  :>,">.">.]  "A 
fugitive    scra]i.''    IV.    69.        His    first 

acquaintance,  subsequent  intimacy 
and  correspondence  with  Jefferson, 
III.  533.  IV.  70.  71,  435.  Rea- 
sons for  not  obtruding  public 
explanations  respecting  attempts 
to  connect  the  Virginia  Resolutions 
&c,  of  171)8  -  '99,  and  himself  with 
the  Nullifying  doctrine,  72.  Cor- 
respondence with  R.  Y.  Hayne  and  E. 
Everett  on  thai  subject,  72.  Corrects 
a  misstatement  that  he  protested 
against  the  Proclamation  of  Neutrali- 
ty. The  protest  was  not  against  the 
Proclamation,  but  against  the  Execu- 
tive prerogative  attempted  to  be  en- 
grafted on  it,  84.  Mfsconstruction  of 
his  Veto  in  Is' 17  against  Internal  Im- 
provements by  Congress,  86,  88,  89, 
IHi.  117,  1  Ki,  2H).  Disposition  in 
sonic  quarters,  rather  to  charge  his 
view  of  the  judicial  power  of  I'.  S., 
"  with  a  departure  from  the  Report 
of  1799,"  than  to  investigate  its  un- 
constitutionality. &c,  II!',  J-i).  Let- 
ters on  a  pamphlet,  edited  by  two 
sons  of  James  A.  Bayard,  to  vindicate 
the  memory  of  their  lather  against 
certain  passages  in  Jefferson's  writ- 
ings, 151  158,  l.">!l.  163,  Kit.  IJetn- 
inescences  of  Princeton  College.  163. 
Repels  a,  charge  of  inconsistency. 
164,  Hi,").  The  inconsistency  is  appar- 
ent only,  not  real,  between  his  origi 
nal  opposition  to  Bank  of  U.  S. 
as  unconsl  tutional  and  his  subse- 
quent assent  to  it  as  1'.  ('.  S.,  165, 
is:;.  1st,  186,  Jill.  Hi."..  211,  231.  The 
Virginia  Resolutions  of  1798  penned 
by  In  in.  166.  A.  paper,  "  reluctantly 
but  unavoidably  "  drawn  up  by  him 


for  an  abortive  Biography.  171.  l.v:'.. 
2 1  i.  Promises  a  brief  chronicle  of 
hi-  career  i  bj  a  friend  to  J.  B.  Long- 
acre,  307,  308.  Effecl  of  age,  .' 
his  handwriting,  I7D.  •_!."..  zi  9.  'i  be 
only  living  signer  of  the  Constitution 
of  U.S.  Sole  survivor  of  those  who 
were  members  of  tin-  Revolutionary 

Congress  prim-  to  the  close  Ol 
war  ;  and  of  the  members  of  the  Con- 
vention in  1776,  which  formed  th9 
firsl  Constitution  of  Virginia,  182. 
[see  ill.  550.]  Repels  the  sug 
lion  that  he  concurred  in  the  doctrine 
of  Secession,  IV.  196.  Vindication 
of  his  "  political  career,"  against  at- 
tempts to  stamp  it  with  •■  discrediting 
inconsistencies,"  205  211.  295,  309, 
Hellers  to  Cabell  in  1828,  210.  He 
had  believed  thai    there  were    few.  if 

any.  of  his  contemporaries,  through 
the  long  period  ami  varied  services 
of  his  political  life,  to  whom  a  muta- 
bility of  opinions  on  great  Constitu- 
tional questions  was  less  applicable. 
210.  231,  321.  Particular  Questions  : 
"Common  Defence  ami  General  wel- 
fare :  "  Roads  and  Canals  :  Tariff: 
Alien  and  Sedition  laws :  Supremacy 
of  Judicial  power  of  l".  S.  on  bound- 
ary of  jurisdiction  between  H.  S.  and 
individual  Slates  :  Bank  I".  S..  211. 
2:12.  321,  -322,  323.  Misrepresenta- 
tions respecting  him  bj  a  clergyman, 
212.  Reflections,  in  a  sick  bed.  on 
the  dangers  hovering  over  the  Con- 
stitution, and  even  the  UxTON  itself, 
218  220.  His  toast  sent  to  a 
Fourth  of  July  celebration,  22-1. 
Elected  President  of  the  American 
Colonization  Society.  27  1.  Vindi- 
cates himself,  E.  Randolph  and  others, 
against  the  charged  having  proposed 
in  the  Federal  Convention  of  l7:-7,  a 
plan  of  a  consolidated  Government, 
Ac.  280—289.  303.  His  proposed  in- 
dication ol'  sonic  errors  in  views  taken 
of  his  political  career.  304.  Never 
wrote  a  speech  beforehand.  Limited 
correction  of  the  Reporter's  notes. 
305.  His  advanced  age  ami  infirm 
health.  306,  309.  :il2,  355,  362,  364. 
365,  366,  :577.  383,  386,  433,  435  Vin- 
dication against  misstatements  re 
sperting  his  course  in  the  Convention 
at  Philadelphia,  published  in  I7,s7.  in 
Yates's  Secret  Debates,  311.  323. 
Charged  with  having  said  "  that  ibtf 
|    States   never  possessed    the    essential 


M    \    D  M    V  .1  ] 


G  E N E HAL    INDEX 


C39 


rights  of  Sovereignty;  that  tbese  were 
ulwa\  -  \  ested  in  I  longress,"  310,  311. 
VVliat  he  mighl  have  said,  and  is  true, 
311.  Charged  with  having  said  "thai 
the  Statea  were  only  great  political 
Corporations,  having  the  power  of 
making  by  laws  :  "  &c,  31 1.  <  Jontrasl 
between  the  theory  and  the  practice  of 
the  old  Confederation.  H>  practical 
inefficiency  the  primary  inducement 
in  its  exchange  for  the  new  syst<  m  ol 
Government,  311.  Charged,  with  hav- 
ing expressed  an  ••  opinion  that  the 
States  ought  to  be  placed  under  the 
control  of  the  General  Government, 
at  least  as  much  as  they  formerly 
v ere  under  the  K.  and  Parliament  of 
<;.  i;.,"  311.  British  power  over  the 
Colonies  as  admitted  by  them,  312. 
Actually  vested  in  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, 312.  Exceptions,  differen- 
ces, and  general  result,  312.  His  idea 
of  a  negative  en  the  State  Law-,  312, 
313.  Radical  cure  for  a  fatal  delect 
of  the  old  Confederation,  admitted  to 
be  uecessarj  and  proper,  313.  Differ- 
ent suggestions,  and  that  finally  pre- 
ferred, as  lo  the  mode  of  controlling 
tbo  Legislation  of  the  States,  313. 
An  imputed  absurdity,  313,  31  !. 
His  admitted  expressions  of  attach- 
ment to  the  rights  of  the  Slates.  314. 
The  logic  of  an  insinuation  thai  lie 
concurred  in  some  peculiar  opinions  of 
Hamilton,  :;!  I.  Agreements  and  dif- 
ferences in  their  opinions,  314.  Alleg- 
ed inconsistency  between  the  Virgin- 
ia Report  of  1799,  1800,  and  Madi- 
Bon's  letter  to  E.  Everett.  August, 
1830.  Extracl  from  the  Report,  315, 
316.  Extract  from  the  letter,  316, 
;;17.  Answers  an  anonymous  com- 
munication, confidentially,  and  why, 
334,  o'.Yi .  Why  he  declined  an  Exec- 
utive appointment  under  President 
Washington,  ami  accepted  one  under 
President  Jefferson,  Mil.  Declines 
taking  part  in  tiie  political  questions 
of  the  day,  355.  Difference  between 
his  relation  to  the  Virginia  Resolu- 
tions of  '98  -  '99,  charged  on  his  in- 
dividual responsibility,  and  his  com- 
mon relation  only  t"  the  ( lonstitution- 
al  questions  now  agitated,  355.  lie- 
serve  in  his  answers  to  dinner  invita- 
tions from  quarters  adverse  to  each 
other.  356.  His  speeches,  addresses, 
&c,  364.  His  Commercial  Resolu- 
tions, called  the  Virginia  ltesolutions, 


offered  in  Congress,  364.  Error  of 
the  supposition  that  a  respect  for 
his  opinion  would  control  the  adverse 
opinions  id'  other-.  367.  Exemplified 
in  the  cases  of  the  Hank,  the  Tariff. 
ami  Nullification,  367.  Elected  Pres- 
ident of  Hie  Washington  National 
Monument  Society.  382.  Obscurity 
of  a  passage  in  a  speech  in  the  First 
I  longress,  126.  Accepts  Dedication  to 
him  of  Tucker's  Life  "t  Jefferson, 
435.  Zeal,  [as  an  advocate  of  the 
Federal  Constitution]  in  promoting 
such  a  re-construction  of  the  political 
system  of  l'.  S.  as  would  provide  for 
their  permanent  liberty  and  happi- 
ness. 435,  436.  A  rejoicing  witness 
of  the  many  good  fruits  it  has  pro- 
duced, 436,  567.  Answers  to  Ad- 
dresses, invitations,  &c,  II.  l.'il — 436, 
i  17.  I  is.  454,  455  158,  463,  464, 
-171.  472,  480,  490,  508,  51  I.  513,  522, 
523,  534,  536,  538,  550,  577,  593,  597, 
599,  (in'.'.  606.  III.  36,  316,  328,  471. 
■172.  -1N7,  524.  IV.  30,  36.  I  Is,  22:;. 
27  1.  297,  344,  :us.  372,  376,  388,  389. 
427.  557.  564.  His  death,  2S  June. 
1836,  432,  v.  Extract  from  his  will. 
5(j'J.  A  letter,  dated  "  Richmond, 
March  23d.,  1836,"  erroi usly  as- 
cribed to  him.  432.n.  His  "Advice 
to  [ins]  country,"  to  be  "  considered 
as  issuing  from  the  tomb,"  "  that  tub 
Union  of  the  States  be  cherished 

.VXD  PEKPETI   LTB.D,"  437.       [See  HI.  49, 

598.     IV.  2  17.  441.  et passim  ] 

Madison,  Right  Rev.  James,  Uishop  op 
Virginia,  and  President  or  Whjjam 
and  Mart  College,  I.  30,  451,  469. 
II.  4:i.  A  second  cousin  of  James 
Madison,  I'.  U.  S..  III.  499.  Biograph- 
ical errors  respecting  him.  500.  Feat- 
ures of  his  character.  IV.  1!)4. 

Madison,  Mrs.  Dolly  P.,  II.  III.  486, 
4*7,  et  post  passim.  [Died  July  12, 
1849.] 

Madison,  Mrs.  Eleanor.  Her  ad- 
vanced age,  HI.  408,  54:),  621,  629. 
[Died  February  11,   1829.] 

Madison, William,  I.  63,60.  II.  140,&c. 

Madison,  YYn  t.iam.  Letter  to  : 
2.".  March.  1829,1V.  36. 

Madison  College,  at  Union  Town, 
l'enn..  III.  584,  596. 

••  Madison  Papers,"  (III.  1253.)  IV 
21. 

Mail.    [See  ;'  Post."] 

Maine,  Province  of.  I.  370.     IV.  :i!)3. 

Majorities.        [See      •'  Sovereignty," 


G40 


GENERAL    INI)  E  X 


[m  a  j 


"  States  of  the  Union."]  Danger  in 
Republics  from  majorities,  IV.  51,  52. 
New  doctrine  of  the  greater  oppres- 
siveness of  majority  Governments  an 
anti  -  Republican  heresy,  325,  3"J6. 
Alleged  abuses  under  the  majority 
Governmenl  of  U.  S.  less  lhan  under 
the  previous  administration  of  the 
Slate  Governments.  The  necessitj 
of  any  Government  is  a  misfortune, 
329.  The  problem  to  be  solved  is. 
which  of  the  forms  of  Governmenl  is 
the  least  imperfect:  and  here  the 
general  question  must  lie  between  a 
Republican  Government,  in  which 
the  majority  rule  (he  minority,  and  a 
Government  in  which  a  less  number 
or  the  least  number  rule  the  majority, 
329.  Final  question,  what  is  the  besl 
structure  of  the  Republican  form? 
329.  To  denounce  majority  Govern- 
ments altogether,  is  to  denounce  all 
Republican  Government,  329.  Ex- 
amples from  the  history  of  Virginia, 
of  a  diversity  of  interests,  real  or 
supposed,  leaving  room  for  an  abuse 
Of  power  by  majorities,  made  up  by 
affinities  of  inteieets,  losing  sighl  of 
the  just  and  general  interest,  329, 
330  The  doctrine  of  a  permanent 
incompatibility  of  interests  in  the 
regulations  ol  foreign  commerce,  ren- 
dering it  unsafe  for  the  agricultural 
population  to  be  under  a  majority 
power  when  pa  ronizing  (he  man- 
ufacturing population.  330,  331.  The 
question  to  lie  decided  is  whether 
the  danger  of  oppression  from  this 
source  must  not  soon  arise  within  the 
several  States  themselves,  331.  Vir- 
ginia must  speedily  lie  a  manufactur- 
ing as  well  as  an  agricultural  State  : 
and  cases  of  the  Tariff,  &c,  musl  be 
decided  by  the  Republican  rule  of 
majorities,  332.  Choice  left  tor  per- 
sons believing  majority  Governments 
as  such,  to  be  the  worst  of  Govern- 
ments. :!:;.'.    Objection  :  The  majority 

as  formed  by  the  Constitution  may  be 
a   minority  when    compared  will   the 

populai  majority.  333.      Likely  t<>  be 

more  or  less  the  case  in  all  elective 
Governments;    and   especially  so  in 

Confederacies.  :;:;:;.  Necessarily  ex- 
ists, to  a  certain  extent,  in  the  com- 
pound system  of  the  V.  s.. :;:',;;.  This 
departure    from    the   rule  of  equality 

liable  to  abuse.  :;:;:'..  Remedy,  the 
amendment  of  the  Constitution,  or.  in 


l  given  cases,  its  subversion,  "'.'>'■'<.  Du- 
ty of  acquiescence  in  the  Constitu- 
tional majority  while  the  Constitution 
exists,  333.  While  the  Constitution 
is  in  force,  the  power  created  by  it, 
whether  a  popular  minority  or  ma- 
jority, musl  lie  the  legitimate  power. 
:;:;:;.  <  Ibedience  to  ii  the  only  alterna- 
tive to  the  dissolution  of  all  ' Jovern- 
ment.  :;.>:;.  A  favorable  considera- 
tion in  given  cases.  :;:;;;.  Result  of 
the  examination,  334.  Whatever  be 
the  hypothesis  of  the  lex  majoris 
partis,  it  evidently  operates  as  a 
plenary  substitute  of  the  win  of  the 
majority  lor  the  will  of  the  whole 
society.  :;'.)'_:.  The  reserved  rights  of 
individuals,  (c.  //.  conscience,)  are 
beyond  the  legitimate  reach  of  Sover- 
eignty, wherever  voted,  or  however 
viewed.  393. 

Majority,  Oppressions  by  the.  1.  336, 
351,  352,  425.     [See  [II.  636.     IV.  22, 

2."). ;:;,  ;>:».  100,  135,  136,  417.] 

Maiden,  II.  538,  539,  543.     III.  396. 

MaLMESBCRY,  I. OKU.  11.  111.  21'.). 

Mat/thus,  Rev.  T.  R.,  His  Essay  on 
Population,  HI.  102,  209-  216,  348, 
349.  His  theory  not  altogether  orig- 
inal. 350. 

Manchester,  III.  615. 

M  wio  Capac,  111.  07. 

Manners.  Want  of  economy  in  the 
use  of  imported  articles,  HI.  158. 
Taste  for  articles  of  luxury.  Habits 
of  boi  rowing,  265,  266. 

Mansfield,  Loud.  II.  260,  329,  :;:;:;. 

Mansfield,  Mi:..  II.  548. 

Manufactories.  Want  of  capital,  and 
of  managing  habits  the  great  obstacle 
to  them  in  Virginia,  III.  627, 

Manufactures.  [See  "  Tariff."]  The 
policy  of  encouraging  domestic  man- 
ufactures an  exception  to  the  general 
rule  of  leaving  to  the  sagacity  &c,  of 

private   interest    the  application    of 

industry  and  capital.  Illustrations. 
111.  42,  43,  160.  Necessity  among 
agricultural  nations  for  an  increase 
of  manufacturing  industry.  129.  Pol- 
icy of  encouraging  them.  160,  161. 
Obstacle  to  them  iu  the  credit  given 

by    foreign    capital    in      the    sale     id' 

imported    manufactures,    ftc.,     171. 

Household  manufactures.  341.  Ef- 
fect of  war  on  cost  of  foreign  pro- 
ducts. 429.   Query  as  to  the  propriety 

of  countervailing  by  encouragements 
to  manufactures,  the  invitations  given 


M  A  N        U  A  E  ] 


G  E  N  E  It  A  L    I  N  DEX 


Gil 


to  agriculture,  A  c,  6]  l.  Redundan- 
cy and  cheapness  of  land  unfavorable 
to  manufactures,  615,  Benefits  to 
woollen  and  silk  manufactures  in  <;. 
B.  from  Flemish  and  French  emi- 
grants, 653,  654  [See  i.  271,  272.  111. 
37,  38„159,  181,  195,  265.] 
Manumission.  [See "  Slavery."]  Pe- 
tition i"  the  Virginia  Legislature,  in 
17n~>.  for  a  genera]  manumission,  I. 
2uu.  Petition  for  a  repeal  of  the  law 
licensing  private  manumissions,  217. 
Progress   of    private   manumissions. 

III.  541.     IV.  213.    Suggestion  of   a 
simple  mode  of  gratifying  the  eman- 

iting    disposition,    III.   541,   542. 
[See  III.  L36,  240.] 

Manures.     III.  69,  mi.  83,  84. 

Marblehead,  Fishermen  <</',  III.  445.  IV. 
360. 

Marbois,  Francis,  Marquis  of  Barbe, 
Letters  to  :     Department  of  State, 
4  November,  1m;:;.  II.  187 
1803,  ••   188 
Charge  d'Affaires  of  France.     Insult 
to     liim     in     Philadelphia.      Proper 
questions   in    the   case,    1.    111.     His 
"History   of    Louisiana,"    IV.    201. 
[See  I.  L02,      II.   187,   188.     III.  169. 

[Marcy,  Vi  ii.i.iam  L.,]  The  first  reputed 
proclaimer  ot  "  The  right  and  policj 
in  a  successful  candidate  for  the 
Presidency  to  reward  friends  and 
punish  enemies,  by  removals  and  ap- 
pointments, Is  now  the  most  vehement 
in  branding  the  practice,"  IV.  357. 

••  Margaretha Magdalena.  The,"  II.  323. 
326. 

"Maria,  The,"  [Case  of  the  Swedish 
Convoy .]  II.  387. 

Marigny,  II.  218. 

Maritime  Code,  Purification  of  the,  II. 
586,  587. 

Marmotte,  The,  I.  234,  235. 

Marriott,  mi;  James,  Cases  derided 
by  him  in  the  High  Court  of  Admiral- 
ty, II.  :;  i-'.  :;  >7. 

Marshall,  John,  I.  253,  262,  356,  387, 
547.  II.  Hi,  84.  Against  a  paper 
emission  in  Virginia,  I.  319.  His 
speech  in  the  case  of  Jonathan  Rob- 
bins,  IV.  57.  [HI.  294,  584.  [V.  60.] 
His  Life  of  Washington,  IV.  167. 
His  death,  [6  July.  1835,]  IV.  382. 

Marshall,  Thomas,  His  speech  in  II. 
of  1).  of  Virginia,  7  January,  1833. 

IV.  i7;;. 

M  utTENS,  W.  F.  BE,  II,  254,  255,  256, 
2G8,  28G. 


Martin,  Luther,  III.  546.     IV.   167, 
288,   289.     His  "passion   and   preju- 
dice," 381. 
M  w:  1 1..  Rev.  Thom  is,  Letter  to  ; 

30  September,  L769,  I.  1. 
Martin's  Threshing  Machine,  II.  111. 
Martinique,  I V.  l;; I. 
Maryland.    Charter  in    1752  to  Lord 
Baltimore,   I.  7:;.  7  l.  75.      Refuses  to 
appoint   deputies   to  the  < lonvention 
ai  Annapolis,  233.    Suggested  expla- 
nation of  the  refusal,  233,  2  16.     <  la- 
mor  for  paper  money, 245,267.    Elec- 
tions in,  II.  2ti.     Law    providing   for 
primary  schools  throughout  the  State. 
III.  522.     IV.    Ins.   I ii:i.     [See  1.  121) 
186,    L97,    275,    27!),    284,    286,    292, 
:;i7,  :;;>i;.  378,  -to:;.    II.  19,  67.  L64, 
431,  134,  435,  -171.  549,  <;t>2.     III.  21  I. 
294,  645,  646.     IV.  L26,  255.] 
Mason,  Gen.  Armistead  T..  His  death, 

III.  117. 
Mason,  George,  Letters  to  : 
UJulv.  1826,  1H.  525 

29  December.  1827,  "  605 
His  importance  in  the  Legislature  of 
Virginia,  I.  7:;.  252.  235.^2:17  —  239, 
245.  Appointed  a  Commissioner  to 
Maryland  to  negotiate  the  establish- 
ment of  regulations  for  the  Potomac, 
87.  A  Commissioner  to  Annapolis, 
216,  217.  223.  His  election  i<»  tho 
Legislature,  232,  237.  Fears  concern- 
ing his  Federal  ideas.  232,  23s.  .\ 
Delegate  to  the  Convention  of  L787,- 
275.  Against  a  paper  emission,  319. 
Refuses  to  subscribe  to  the  Constitu- 
tion. His  fixed  disposition  to  prevent, 
if  possible,  its  adoption  by  Virginia, 
354.  His  objections  ami  acknowl- 
edgments. 354,  355.  The  violence  of 
his  passions,  388.  Author  of  the 
Constitution,  and  of  the  Declaration 
of  Rights,  of  Virginia,  III.  151,452, 
575.   .v.i:;.   594.    IV.   42.    Appointed 

• of  the  Revisors  of  the  Laws,  but 

resigns,  [11.580,594.  A  leading  cham- 
pion, in  the  Convention  of  Virginia,  in 
177ii,  for  the  instruction  to  her  dele- 
gates to  propose  in  Congress  a  ••  J>ee- 
laration  of  Independence,"  606.  His 
correspondence   with    .Madison,   608. 

[See  I.  SO.  1  18,  160,  2:'.2,  2i;  1,  2(12, 
328,  364,  366,  368,  378.  387.  398,  399, 
401,  405.  III.  151,  17(1,  520,  543. 
594.     IV.  288.] 

Mason,  Gen.  John.  HI.  575. 

Mason,  Stevens  T.,  II.  26,  31.  64. 

Mason,  Thompson,  His  death,  I.  152. 


VOL.    IV. 


41 


C12 


GENERAL     INDEX 


[MAS  —  M  I  G 


Mason,  Dr..  TIL  MO.     IV.  304. 

Masonry,  Free,  IV.  150,  l.Jl. 

Massachusetts.  Letter  to  the  Re- 
publican Members  of  the  Legis- 
lature  of,  March,  1815,  II.  599. 
Her  commercial  efforts,  I.  197. 
Shays's  Rebellion  in  1786,  253,  254, 
276,  278,  2S0,  319.  Terms  of  a  prof- 
fered amnesty  rejected  by  half  of'  the 
insurgents,  282.  Wicked  measures 
of  the  malcontents,  316,  317.  Pro- 
poses nine  amendments  to  Constitu- 
tion of  U.  S.,  IV.  129.      Elections   in. 

II.  25,  29,  34.  Alleged  votes  of 
negroes  and  British  sailors,  29.  Claim 
against'U.  S.,  III.  141,  434.  Her  res- 
toration to  the  bosom  of  the  republi- 
can family.  317.  Insurrectional  spir- 
it, and  unconstitutional  extension  of 
State  powers  displayed  by  the  party 
ascendent  in  the  Slate  Government 
of  Massachusetts,  contrasted  with 
their  doctrines,  &c,  when  the  Gener- 
al Government,  was  regarded  as  in 
their  hands,  321,  322.  [See  I.  1  13, 
226,  275.  277,  281,  282,  284,  292.  357. 
3G8,  369,  374,  3/6,  377.  381,  385,  509, 
511,  516.  II.  19,  76.  78,  8:;.  225,  531. 
540.  542.  599.  III.  169,  21  I.  210.  321, 
544.     IV.  05,  2-1  I.  25  1,  393.] 

Mathews,  II.  534. 

Matrimony,  III.  568. 
Matthews,  Gen.  George,  I.  451. 
Maury,  F.,  I.  341,  448. 
*Maurt,  James,  Letters  to  : 
29  December,  181!),  III.  157 
28  September,  1822.    "     284 
24  March,  1823,   "     310 

5  April,  1828,    "     627 

10  December,    1830,  IV.  146 
[See  II.  223,  533.] 
Maury,  Mi;.,  (son  of  J.  Maury.  Liver- 
pool,) Letter  to  : 
24  December,  1819,  III.  157. 
Maury,  W.,  I.  75,  79. 
Maury,  Mi:.,  I.  33,65,88,98,143,150,220. 
Mayhew,   Dr.  Benjamin,  His  sermon, 

III.  1(15. 

]\I  wo,  Robert,  and  W.  R.  Barlow, 
Letter  to : 
31  March  1823,  TIT.  31(1 
Maxims.    "  Misera  est  servitus  ubi  jus 
est  aut  vagum  aut  incognitum,"  IV. 
184.    "Qui  lucre!  in  iitera,  boeret  in 
cortice,,'  351.    "  Every  right  has  its 
remedy,"  417.  418. 
Mazzei,  Philip,  Letters  to: 
7  Julv,  L781,  I.     44 

10  December,  1788,  "  444 


His  visit  to  Patrick  Henry.  T.  77. 
His  views  to  a  consulate,  and   enmity 

to  Franklin,  78.  His  favorable  opin- 
ion of  J.  Adams.  7s.  His  book,  I  I  I. 
[See  I.  71),  so.  333,  331,  339,  408.  II. 
70.  89,  95,  131.] 

Meade,  Joel  K..  Letter  to  • 
16  October,  1820,  III.  183 

Mease,  .  His  oration  on  Hydro- 
phobia, I.  562. 

Mediation,  Proposed,  between  Spain 
and  South  America,  III.  111. 

Mediterranean  Trade,  IV.  502,  503. 

Meigs,  Josiah,  Surveyor  General  TJ. 
S..  II.  548. 

Meigs,  Return  J.,  Postmaster  General 

U.  S..  in.  (i. 
••  Menial  Philosophy,"  Treatise  on,  IV. 

179. 
••  Mentor,  The.-  11.445. 
"Mercantile  Advertiser "  The,  N.   Y.. 

II.  559. 

"  Mercantilism,"  II,  13,  100. 
Mercer,  Charles  Fenton,    III.    600, 

602,  603. 
Mercer.  James,  said  to  be  against  the 

new  Constitution,  I.  356. 
Mercer, ,  A  Judge  of   the 

Court    of   Appeals    of    Virginia,   I. 

■IDs. 

Mercer,  John  E.,  I.  114.  Ill,  204,  213, 
232,  237,  339,  364.  II.  10.  His 
pamphlet,  I.  237. 

Mercer,    Gov.,    His   project    and  its 
tendencies.  II.  185. 
" Mercurius,  Tin."  IT.  .",13. 
Merino  Sheep,  11.  473.  477. 
Merry,  Anthony,  Minister  from  G.  B. 
to  U.S.,  H.  189. 
Letters  to  : 

9  February,     1804,  II.   199 
3  September.       "       "     206 
"       ••    206 
January,       1806,   "    216 
Tlis  ''diplomatic  superstition, ''  U.  195. 
His  communication  concerning  block- 
ades. IV.  434.     [See  11.  201,  221,  399, 
400,401.     III.  45.] 
Merry,  Mrs.  II.  L89,  195. 
Methodists.  I.  217.     111.  124. 
Mexico,  II.  521.     III.  516,  540. 
Michigan  Territory,  III.  394,  414. 
Michilimackinac.    II.    542,    544.      III. 
395,  406. 

"  Midnight  Precedents,"  III.  221. 

"Migration    and    importation    of  per- 

.."  Clause    relative    to,  in   Art.   I. 

Sec.  9,  of  Const.  1'.  S..  III.  1 19—157, 

165.      Effect  of  migration   from   the 


M  I  L  —  K  I  8  ] 


( ;  I :  V  E  R  A  L     INDEX 


643 


Atlantic  to  the  ultramontane  regions 
in  reducing  the  value  of  products  in 
glutted  markets,  nit;. 
decree,  [I.  160,  535. 
/   Bill,  I.  547,550.     II.  33,  35. 
vry  Districts.  Partition  of   U.  S. 
into  Military   Districts,   II.  578.     Hi- 
ll 1.  11.-.. 

Prospecl    of  making 
tlir  <  lamp  at  Warwick  an  auxilia 
the  Judicial  Department,  II.  inn. 

Military  roads,  III.  56. 

Mi  Itia.  I.  289,  490,  502,  525,  52S. 
.Ml'.  II.  35,  540,  583.  III.  322.  411, 
412,  415,  416. 

Militia  Law,  I.  210. 

Miller,  Col.  James,  III.  421. 

Millot,  Abbe  Claude  F.  X.,  His  Ele- 
ments  of  Universal  History,  III.  205. 

Milton,  (  'ml.  Homes  Virgil,  III.  398. 
:.   Mass..  Letter  to  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  town  of : 
18  May.  1812,  II.  534. 

Minerva,  ami  measures  of  wisdom,  III. 
480. 

Minerva.,  and  tin'  Federal  <  institution, 
IV.  341.  342. 

Ministers  of  the  Gospel.  Objections  to 
their  exclusion  from  tin'  Legislature, 
I.  L89. 

Minor,  P.,  in.  287. 

Minor,  Mi:..  III.  116. 

Minorities.  Safeguards  to  them  in  Con 
stitution  of  U.S.,  IV.  135,  136. 

Minority.  Circumstances  in  which  a 
minority  may.  in  an  appeal  to  force, 
bo  an  overmatch  for  a  majority.  I. 
322. 

Mint,  T.  152,550. 

Miranda,  Gen.  Francisco,  II.  220.  Dif- 
ficulty as  to  a  disclosure  of  his  inter- 
views with  the  Executive,  225,  226. 
Burr's  opinion  of  hi  in.  II.  Hid. 

Mission  to  tin'  Baltic,  H.  583. 

Mississippi  River.    [S Jay,  John," 

••  Pittsburgh," ''Spain," "  Virginia."] 
The  use  of  it  given  by  nature  to  our 
Western  Country.  I.  121.  Proper 
policy.  136.  Interest  of  European 
rowers  in  the  question.  138,  139. 
Amazement  at  the  thought  of  sur- 
rendering the  Mississippi,  ami  guaran- 
tying tin;  possessions  of  Spain  in 
America,  2:;:).  240,  241.  111.  189, 
196.  Views  of  Spain  in  satisfying 
herself  with  the  temporary  occlusion, 
while  asserting  the  claim  of  U.  S.  to 
be    absolutely   inadmissible,   I.  24G. 


.">I7.  Jay's  proposition,  2  IK.  252. 
Party  in  Congress  for  surrendering 
th"  M.  to  Spain.  2o.-).  Unfavorable 
influence  of  the  project  on  Virginia, 

262.  Claim  of  U.  S.  for  tin'  na 
tion  of  M.  through  Spanish  Territorj . 
III.  346,  166.  [V.  90,  1  Is.  Instruc- 
tions to  franklin  ami  .lay.  Ill  117. 
Fixed  as  the  boundary  between 
the    Spanish    settlements    ami     U.  S., 

■ill.  Right  of  U.  S.  to  West- 
ern Territory  as  fat-  as  the  Mis- 
Bissippi    river,    1 12,    1 13.       Reasons 

I'm-  their  insisting  on  it.  ami  for  Spain 
not  to  wish  a  relinquishment  of  it. 
-1 13—  1 15.  The  i'yi'o  navigation  oi  the 
Mississippi  river  for  {' .  s.  in  common 
with  Spain,  a  right,  derived  from  the 
7th  Article  of  the  Treaty  of  Paris,  in 
17t;:!.    I  15.  Contingent     considera- 

tions respecting  tic  navigation  of  the 
Mississippi,  affecting  the  interests  of 
tin'  Maritime  Powers  in  general,  and 
especially  France  and  Spain,  446, 
117.  The  instruction  to  Jay  to  re- 
linquish the  navigation  of  (he  Missis- 
sippi below  the  Southern  boundary 
of  U.  S.  erroneously  supposed  to 
have  had  its  origin  with  the  -late 
of  Virginia,  550.  The  Delegates 
from  S.Carolina  and  Georgia,  zealous 
for  yielding  the  claim  of  V .  S.  to  the 
navigation  of  the  Mississippi,  a-  the 
only  means  of  drawing  Spain  into  an 
alliance,  559,  560,  561.  Course  of 
Madison  and  Bland,  the  Delegate,  in 
Congress  from  Virginia,  and  of  her 
Legislature,  560.  [See  I.  93—98,  100, 
136.  110.  L53,  158,  184,  27.1.  252,  315, 
399,  117,  428.  II.  1 7s. 170,  181.  III. 
466.     IV.  oo.  148.] 

Mississippi  Territory,  Letter  to  tue 
Representatives  of  tue  : 
July,  1809, H.  448. 

[See  if.    110.      III.  270.] 

Missouri.    [S< Slavery."]   Amount 

of  the  Missouri  question  as  a  Consti- 
tutional one.  III.  156.  Question  as  to 
the  coupling  of  Missouri  with  Maine. 
164.  Difficulty  in  admitting  Mis- 
souri, from  the  word  "forever," 
coupled  with  the  inderdict  relating 
to  Slavery  in  the  territory  X.  of  lati- 
tude 36°  lid"..  III.  167,  168.  [See  Act 
of  6th  March,  1820,  Sec.  8.]  Appro- 
bation of  the  Missouri  Compromise, 
168.  Debates  on  the  Missouri  quest- 
ion, excitement,  &c,   109,   175,   100. 


G44 


GENERAL 


Clause  in  her  State  Constitution, 
requiring  the  Legislature  to  ex- 
clude free  colored  persons  from  sett- 
ling in  the  Shite.  III.  186,  1ST.  190, 
199.  Renewal  of  the  fermentation  in 
the  Missouri  Case,  195.  Mitigated 
feelings  in  Congress,  199. 

Missouri  question.  [See  "  Missouri."] 
III.  219,  240,  483. 

Missouri  tribes  of  Indians,  III.  215. 

Mitchell, ,  Governor  of ,  III. 

388,  391,  392. 

Mobile.  II.  180. 

Mohegan  languague,  I.  419. 

Moira,  Francis,  Lord,  II.  490. 

Moles,  I.  235. 

Monarchy.  A  twofold  danger  in 
monarchies,  IV.  467.  A  party  proba- 
bly aiming  at  a  gradual  approxima- 
tion of  our  Government  to  a  mixed 
monarchy,  I.  558.  The  "  monarchi- 
cal party,"  II.  119. 

Monax.  I.  234,  235. 

••  Money,"  IV.  460,  466.  Error  of  the 
opinion  that  the  price  of  things  vend- 
ible will  vary  according  to  the  varia- 
tion in  the  quantity  of  the  circula- 
ing  medium,  460,  4rl.  Effects  as- 
cribed to  its  depreciation,  which  re- 
sult from  other  causes,  461,  n. 

"  Monocrats,"  I.  601. 

Monopoly,  III.  289,  567.  Monopolies 
among  the  greatest  nuisances  in  Gov- 
ernment.     Suggestion,  1.  427. 

Monroe,  James,  Letters  to  : 


November, 

14  November, 

27  November, 
4  December, 

17  December, 
24  December, 

8  January, 
21  March, 

12  April, 

28  April. 

29  May, 

21  June, 

7  August, 

9  December, 
24  December, 

30  December, 

22  January, 
19  March, 

9  April, 

13  May, 
4  June, 

21  June, 

15  August, 
17  August, 


1784,  I. 


1785, 


1786, 


107 
108 
109 
112 
114 
114 
120 
141 
143 
152 
153 
155 
169 
203 
208 
210 
221 
228 
229 
237 
238 
239 
248 
248 


INDEX. 

[ 

MIS  — 

11  September 

1786, 

I.  249 

5  <  October, 

" 

"  250 

30  October, 

" 

"  251 

21  December, 

u 

"  266 

19  April, 

1787, 

"  315 

13  May, 

1789, 

"  469 

9  August, 

" 

"  489 

17  April, 

1790 

"  517 

1  June, 

'• 

"  519 

17  June, 

it 

"  520 

4  July, 

a 

"  521 

24  July. 

tt 

"  522 

15  September 

1793, 

"  601 

29  October, 

" 

"  605 

4  December, 

1794, 

II.    23 

11  March, 

1795, 

"     37 

26  March. 

CI 

"     40 

20  December, 

a 

"     64 

26  January, 

1796, 

"     73 

26  February, 

" 

"     82 

7  April, 

" 

"     91 

8  April, 

u 

"     96 

14  May, 

<< 

"  101 

17  December, 

'• 

"   119 

5  February, 

1798, 

"  123 

9  Juno, 

" 

"   145 

23  May, 

1800, 

tt 

"   160 
"  160 

10  November, 

u 

"  162 

10  November, 

" 

"  163 

December, 

a 

"  165 

6  May, 

1801, 

"  172 

1  June, 

" 

-  173 

25  July, 

ti 

"  174 

24  October, 

a 

"  175 

8  January, 

1802, 

"   176 

19  January, 

" 

"  176 

1  March, 

1803, 

"   177 

20  April, 

" 

"  180 

1  May, 

tt 

"  182 

30  July, 

tt 

"  1S3 

10  October, 

ti 

"  186 

26  December, 

« 

"  1S9 

1 8  January, 

1804, 

•'    192 

ic  February. 

" 

"  195 

8  March. 

" 

"  200 

9  November, 

CI 

"  208 

3  December, 

It 

"  210 

2  1  September, 

1805, 

"  213 

13  January, 

1806, 

"  216 

10  March," 

II 

"  218 

17  May. 

" 

"  223 

4  June, 

a 

"  224 

20  March, 

1807, 

"  403 

25  May, 

" 

"  406 

25  July, 

a 

"  407 

5  January, 

1808, 

"  410 

6  February, 

" 

"  422 

18  March, 

>( 

"  422 

MON  —  MON] 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


G45 


21  March,  1808,  II.  423 
30  March,  "        "   424 

is  April,  •'        '•    424 

3  June.  1814,111.403 

L815,    II.  609 

22  August,  1817,  111.  46 
■l'.)  November,      "        "     50 

!)  December,      "        "     51 

27  December,      '•        "     54 

21  May,  1818,    "     5)7 

ober,         -        "   110 

28  November,  "  "  112 
13  February,     1819,    "    117 

18  February,  "  "  118 
6  September,     "        "    147 

10  February,     1820,    "    164 

23  February,        "        "  107 

19  November,      "        "    186 

28  December,  "  "  199 
0  May,  1822,     "    207 

10  [?]  May,  "        "    209 

2  1  September,  "  "  282 
13  February,    1823,     "   296 

9  June,  •         ••    320 

30  October,         "        "   3:','.) 

6  December,  "  "  3.V2 
2ii  December,      "        "    3."':'. 

4  February,     1824,     "    303 

5  February,  "  "304 
13  April,  "         "    433 

5  August,  "         "    446 

16  December,      "         "    473 

20  March.  1825,     "    484 

22  September,  1827,     "   5S8 

29  October,  "  "  595 
16  November,  "  "  599 
18  December,      "         "    602 

23  January,  1828,  "  612 
26  February,  "  "  623 
is  May,  1830,  IV.    82 

21  April,  1831,    "    178 

His  critical  escape  from  a  danger,  I. 
108.  In  favor  of  a  power  in  Con- 
gress to  regulate  trade.  197.  Against 
a  paper  emission  in  Ya.,  319.  His  ad- 
dress to  the  French  Convention,  II. 
23.  Extracts  of  letters  from  him,  00, 
104.  Base  insinuations  that  he  had 
purchased  Cliantilly,  00.  Suspicions 
of  an  intention  to  recall  him  from  his 
mission  to  France,  84,  92.  Robbed, 
92.  His  publication  entitled  "View 
of  the  conduct  of  the  Executive. 
&c,"  120,  121.  Attacks  on  him 
by  Addison  and  J.  Adams.  His  de- 
mand for  the  reasons  of  his  recall. 
146,  148.  Governor  of  Virginia, 
TElected  1799.]  104.  His  message  to 
the    General    Assembly,    176.      His 


special  mission  to  France,  in    1803, 
lso.  is:;.  184,  193,  194.    IV.  2011.    lii- 
contemplated  trip  to  Madrid.  II.  2112. 
203.      1 1  is  desire   to  return  to  F.  S., 
220.     His  conversations  with  Fox  and 
Grey,   221.     Minister    to    (•■   B.  II., 
[Nov.  15,1803,]   Joint  Commissioner 
Plenipotentiary  with  W.  I'..  April  21. 
1806.   Selections  from  his  correspond- 
ences of  parts  proper  for  Congress. 
423,424.    His  willingness  to  have  taken 
a  seal  in  the  Cabinet,  loo.     Secretary 
of   State.   492,  514,   515.    Secretary 
of  War,  587.     His  prohibitory   letter. 
October  13,  1814,  to  Gen.  Jackson, 
111.    596,  600.     His  tour  as  P.  I*.  S;, 
and  its  public  advantage.  40.  17.     His 
reception    at   the   South.    128.       His 
first   annual   message.    Dec.  2,    1817, 
51.       Latitude    of    the   principle    on  ■ 
which  the  right  of  a  civilized  People 
is  asserted  over  the  lands  of  a  savage 
one.   52,  55.      His    sound  judgment. 
102.    103.      "  Thorny  circumstances" 
thrown  in  his  way  by  the  folly  of  the 
Spanish  Government,  105,  I06.     His 
Fourth  Annual  Message,  Nov.  14. 1820, 
180.     His  Seventh  Annual   Message, 
December    2,    1823,   433,  434.      His 
Message  on  the  compact  with  Georgia, 
434.      His   Eighth   Annual    Message. 
December  7,    1824,  473.     His  claim 
for     reimbursement,     compensations. 
Ac.    174.      Re-appointed  a  visitor  of 
the  University  ofVa.,  484.  Appointed  a 
Presidential  elector,  and  declines  serv- 
ing. (.13.   His  paper  on  IV.  16. 
His  proposed  removal  to  New  York. 
Settlement  by   Congress   of    his  ac- 
counts,  178.     His  age   and  state  of 
health.    198.      His    death,    [on    the 
Fourth  of  July  1831.]  188,  189.    Fea- 
tures   of    his    character.    189.       His 
letter   to   Madison   "emphatic  in  its 
anti-  nullifying  language."  354.      Ex- 
tracts from  his  letters.  May  15,  and 
June  4,  1800,  to  Madison.  413,  n.  [See 
1.103,141,    101,   176.    195,    221.    232. 
247,  248,  3S7.  449,  45s.  488,525,  527, 
529.  502,  579',  591,  593,  597,  598.     II. 
14,  18,  20,  37,  39,  59,  64.  09.   70,   72, 
81,  84.  90,   111,   117,   118.   119,  138. 
102,  103,  192,  405.  400.  407,  492.  540. 
541,  572,  588.     III.  15,  21.  22.  23,  25, 
30,  32,  39,  46,  299,  403,  404,  408,  422. 
423,  424,  602,  620,  623.      IV.  00,  65, 
86.  115,  196.] 
Montksqiieu,  Charles,   Bakox  de,   I. 
293,592,614.  IV.  327,  424,464.    Inac- 


646 


G  E  N  E  R  A  L    INDEX. 


[JIOS  —  X  A  T 


curacy  cf  his  theory,  resolving  the 
greal  operative  principles  of  <  rovern- 
ment  into  fear,  honor  and  virtue,  174. 

Montpelier,  (Vermont,)  III.  595.  [V.  30. 

Montreal,  II.  539,  542,  547,  549.  111. 
393,  394,  401.  416,  561. 

Moore.  Andrew,  I.  453,  458,  577. 

Moore,  William,  Elected  President  of 
Pennsylvania,  I.  57. 

Moore,  Major. ,  I.  330. 

"■Moral  Instructor."  Terry's,  111.  258. 

Morales, .  Mischiefs  of  his  con- 
tinuance in  Louisiana,  II.  199.  203. 

Moravians,  III.  492. 

Moreau,  Gen.  Joun  V.,  His  Memoir, 
II.  481. 

MOREAU,  DE    LlSLET,  II.  479. 

Moreri,  Louis.  His  Historical  Dictiona- 
ry. I.  145. 

Morgan,  Gen.  Daniel,  Defeats  a  de- 
tachment of  Cornwallis's  best  troops, 

I.  45.  Escapes  with  his  prisoners, 
45. 

Morgan,  George,  His  plan  of  estab- 
lishing a  Colony  beyond  the  Missis- 
sippi, I.  452,  460.  His  invitation, 
455—457. 

Morier,  J.  P.,  Secretary  of  Legation 
and  Charge,  &c,  from  G.  B.  to  U.  S., 

II.  498,  504.  505. 

Morris.  Anthony,  Letter  to  : 
28  May,  1827,  III.  580. 

Morris,  Capt.  Charles,  III.  10. 

Morris,  Gouverneur,  I.  441,443,494, 
540,  His  appointment  as  Minister  to 
France,  unfortunate,  I.  598.  His  ser- 
vice in  the  Convention  of  1787,  IV. 

169,  170.  Political  opinions,  168. 
Ability,  brilliancy,  candor,  &e.,  1G9, 

170,  203.  His  diplomatic  agency  in 
G.  IX,  [after  J.  Adams's  return  in 
1788.]  499.      [See  III.  181,  324.] 

Morris,  Robert.  A  Senator  from  Penn- 
sylvania, I.  420.  422,  442.  [See  I. 
443.     LT.  20.     IV.  169.] 

Morris, .  II.  526.     III.  320.     IV. 

48. 

Morrow, ,  III.  398. 

Morse,  Rev.  Jedediah,  Letters  to  : 
16  February,  1822,  III.  259 
8  March,        1823,  "     305 
28  March.  "       "     310 

His  Geographicalw ork s.  111.  305. 
English  Queries  concerning  the  con- 
dition. Ac  (it  Slaves,  transmitted  by 
him  to  .Madison.  310 — 313.  Answers, 
so  tar  as  the  Queries  relate  to  Virgin- 
ia, 313—315. 

Moistier,  E.  F.  E.,  Count  (or  Marquis) 


de,  Minister  from  France  to  U.  S..  I. 
369,  i-'9.  17 1.  His  questions ;  an- 
swers to  them.  430—  133.  173. 

Moylan,  Gen., ,  II.  149. 

Muhlenberg,  Frederick  A.,  Fleeted 
Speaker  of  II.  i;..  I.  461,  162.  His 
casting  vote  as  Chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  whole  iii  favor  of  .lav's 
Treaty,  II.  99,  101.  [See  II.  02,  99, 
133.] 

Mule,  The,  III.  92.  520. 

Murray,  William  Ya\s.  His  Speech  on 
the  British  Treaty,  II.  90.  Commiss- 
ioner  to  France.  168. 

Murray, ,  II.  68. 

"Museum,  The"  IV.  304. 

Miter, ,  I.  561. 

-  Mutius,"  IV.  304,  310,  313,  314,  315, 
318,  319. 


N. 


Nagel.  Baron  de,  III.  3. 

"  Navy,  The,"  Case  of,  II.  325. 

Naj)les,  III.  3.  34,  189,  235,  238,  329. 

Napoleon.  [See  ' '  Bonaparte,  Napo- 
leon."] 

Natchez.  II.  181. 

■•  y<dio>ial  Gazette"  Freneau's,  IV. 
304. 

"  National    Gazette,"  Walsh's,  IV.  164. 

National  Government.  It  should  be 
armed  with  full  authority  in  all 
requiring-  uniformity.  I.  288.  Its  su- 
premacy should  be  extended  to  the 
Judiciary  department.  Oaths  of  the 
Judges.  Admiralty  jurisdiction,  289. 
Officers  administering  the  Executive 
Departments  should  be  appointed  by 
Hie  National  Government,  289.  The 
Militia  ought  to  be  under  its  authori- 
ty. 289.  The  National  Government 
should  be  well  organized  and  bal- 
anced. The  Legislative  and  Execu- 
tive Departments,  289,  290. 

"National  Intelligencer,"  It.  478.  179. 
513.  530.  III.  170,  241,  378,  401,  414, 
533.     IV.  110,  169,  338. 

'•  National  Recorder.''  III.  170. 

Natural  History,  III.  290.  [See 
"  Opossums."]  Skin  of  an  animal  be- 
longing to  the  region  of  the  Rocky 
.Mountains.  II.  4  15. 

Naturalization.  A  question  before  the 
First  Congress  whether  the  Revolu- 
tion had  not  dissolved  the  social  com- 
part, and  produced  a  state  of  nature 
which   required   a  naturalization  of 


NAT  —  NEW] 


G  E  N  E  H  A  L     !  X  I)  E  X . 


G4T 


those  who  had  not  participated  in  the 
Revolution,  IV.  392. 

Ion  mil,  in  II.  It.,  II.  30,  31, 
32.  33. 

I  Citizens  of  !'■  8.,  H.  557, 
558.  Suggested  change  in  the  law  of 
Naturalization,  III.  L20. 
Naval  Armament.  Arguments  used 
for  anil  against  the  Naval  Armament 
of  1794,  IV.  502  —  504. 

'  laws  of  Rhodes,  of  Oleron,  of 
Wisburg,  and  of  the  Hanse  towns,  II. 
233.  •' 

Navigation.  [See  "  Great  Britain," 
■  I  kited  States."]  III.  560,  507. 
628,  640,  641. 

Navigation  Act,  III.  35. 

Navy,  I.  393.  II.  564,  002.  III.  10. 
Project  of  a  squadron  of  frigates, 
II.  6. 

Navy  Board.  Relation  between  Com- 
missioners  of  X.  1!.  and  the  Execu- 
tive through  the  Secretary  of  the 
Navy,  II.  604.  Construction  of  the 
phrases  " shall  discharge,"  and '■un- 
der the  superintendence,"  &c,  604, 
605.  Restriction  on  the  power  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Navy.  605.  Certain 
powers  specially  rested  in  N.  B.,  005. 
606. 

Neckar,  James,  r.  160,  494.  Passage 
in  his  work  on  the  Finances  of 
France,  showing  the  difficulty  in  col 
lecting  taxes  of  different  rates  in  the 
different  provinces,  III.  646. 

Neelt,  Major, .11.  460. 

Negative  on  the  local  Legislatures'  in  all 
eases  a  proper  Federal  power.  I.  285, 
288,  289,  290. 

Nelson,  H.,  II.  L62. 

Nelson, .  IV.  294. 

Nelson.  Gbn.  Thomas.  I.  232.  237.  23!), 
357.  Appointed  a  Delegate  to  the 
Federal  Convention,  vice  Patrick 
Henry,  declining.  284.  Petition  in 
behalf  of  Lis  heirs.  &c.,  to  the  Va. 
Legislature.  IV.  323.  His  exalted 
patriotism.  See.,  324. 

Nelson.  W..  J.  357. 

Neth Hands,  111.  653. 

Neutrality  defined,  I.  027.  "Armed 
Neutrality."'  in  1780,  II.  271.  585. 

Neutrals.  [See  "Blockade,"  "Great 
Britain,"  ■Scott.  Sir  William."] 
Prospect  of  a  Northern  Confederacy 
of  Neutrals,  II.  109.  Examination 
of  the  British  doctrine  which  sub- 
jects to  capture  a  neutral  trade  not 
open  in   time  of   peace,   227  —  391. 


Examination,   dtc,    authorities,   ! 
359.      Treaties,   260.      Examples   to 

which  G.  B.  is  not  a  party.  264.  Trea- 
ties to  which  England  first,  and  then 
I  r.  B.  was  a  party,  268.  Conducl  of 
other  nations,  289.  Conducl  of  G.  I!., 
290.  The  judicial  exposition  of  neu- 
tral rights  even  under  the  British  re- 
striction, 334,  Instructions  of  24 
June.  1803,  327,  336.  Neutrals  car- 
rying enemy's  property,  385.  Free 
sailors  in  neutral  vessels,  IV.  134. 
Review  of  the  reasons  nrged  in  de- 
fence of  the  British  principle,  II. 
349  —  393.  Acknowledgment  of  the 
Cabinet  of  G.  P..  334.  Searches  of 
Neutral  vessels,  385.  Frequent  ig- 
norance or  corruption  of  Vice  Admi- 
ralty Courts,  386.  Proportion  of  af- 
firmances to  reversals  by  the  Superior 
Court,  386.     [See  II.  586.] 

New  England  : 

Letter  to  the  New  England  Socie- 
ty in  New  York  : 
20  December,  1834,  IV.  372. 
Opinions  in  New  England   respecting 
the  new  Constitution  classified.  I.  365. 

••  New  England  Farmer,  The]'  III.  95, 
499.     [See  IV.  108.] 

New  Hampshire,  I.  275.  281.  284,  331. 

355,  368,  377,  381.  382,  383,  518.      II. 

19,  67,   78,   83,  510    550.     Proposes 

e  amendments  to  Constitution  of 

U.  S.,  IV.  129,  255. 

New  Haven  : 

Letter    to    the     inhabitants     of 

Til  10      TOWN     OF, 

24  May.  1811,11.508. 
New   Haven   remonstrance,   II.   508, 
512. 

New  Jersey,  I.  197,  226,  229.  275, 
279,  281,  356.  368.  II.  83,  175.  432, 
433,  536.  III.  308,  639.  IV.  225. 
-~>~>.  Emission  of  paper  money.  I. 
241.  Singular  manner  of  election  to 
the  First  Congress,  arising  from  an 
omission  in  the  law  to  fix  a  time  for 
closing  the  polls.  Governor's  Proc- 
lamation, 453.  454.     Elections,  II.  29. 

New  Jersey,  Case  of  the  Sliip,  II. 
219. 

New  Orleans  : 

Letter  to  the  City  Council  of  : 
23  July,  1809,  II.  447. 
Island  of  N.  O.,  II.  191.  Memorial 
from  N.  O.,  210.  Dreadful  mortality 
at  X*.  O.,  210.  Public  property  at 
N.  O.,  410,  411.  Battle  of  N.  O.,  601 
[See  II.  177,  180,  181,  447.      HI.   22, 


G4S 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[NEW  —  NOR 


393,  409,  466.     IV.  90,  145,  146,  148, 
262,  278.] 

New  Orleans  packet,  Case  of ,  II.  518. 

'•  New  Views,''  III.  367. 

New  York.  [See  "  Vermont."]  Her 
negotiations  with  the  Indians,  I.  109. 
Construction  of  the  proviso  in  the 
Articles  of  Confederation  concerning 
the  Indians,  109,  J 1  o.  Emission  of 
paper  money.  '.M4.  Proposition  for 
relinquishing  her  claim  to  Vermont 
and  admitting  V.  into  the(  lonfederacy, 
283.  Distress  caused  by  the  sudden 
stagnation  of  paper  money,  334.  Move- 
ments concerning  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution, 40-'.  Circular  letter  from 
the  Convention  of  N.  Y.,  410,  412, 
417,  418,  428.  Dispute  between  the 
two  Houses  of  the  Legislature  re- 
specting the  manner  of  appointing 
Senators  for  Congress,  460.  Elec- 
tions in,  II.  26,  29,  34,  582.  Position 
of  N.  Y.  but  imperfectly  understood 
out  of  the  State.  225.  III.  5.  Revis- 
ion of  her  Constitution,  257,  258. 
Abuses  committed  by  law  makers  and 
law  breakers,  III.  567.  Proposes 
thirty  three  amendments  to  the  Consti- 
tution U.S..  IV.  129.  [See  I.  178, 
187,  226,  247,  275.  277,  279,  281,  284, 
355,  375,  382,  399,  405,  400.  407,  433. 
47:;.  516.  II.  07,  103,  593.  III.  L69, 
177,  41(i,  512,  513,  524,  54  1.  574,  040. 
IV.  20,  64,  65,  108,  251,  255.] 

The  General  Republican  Committee 
of  the  City  and  County  of  New  York, 
Letter  to  : 
24  September,  1809,  II.  455. 

New  York  city,  I.  156,  292,  413,  539. 
II.  5,  47,  65,  66,  95,  455.  III.  162, 
409.  415,  410,  541.  IV.  90,  148. 
Bankruptcies  in,  I.  550.  552,  553. 

"New  York  Commercial  Advertiser," 
IV.  376. 

New  York  "  Historical  Society, "  IV. 
325,  378. 

Newcastle,  Thomas.  Ddke  of,  II.  387. 

Newfoundland,  Fisheries,  111.  463,  467. 
Cession  of  the  island  of  N.  to  Eng- 
land, 463.     [See  III.  409.] 

Newspapers.    [See  "Tax."] 

Newton,  Sib  Isaac  established  an  im- 
mortal system,  IV.  47  1. 

Newton,  Col. ,  II.  165. 

Niagara,  II.  540,  549.  558.  III.  390. 
393,  396,  415,  505. 

Nicholas.  GEORGE,  1.  232,  237,  387. 
561.  111.5/6,594.  His  death,  IV. 
199. 


Nicholas,  John,  Letters  to  : 
2  April,  1813,     II.  562 

30  .May,  L816,  III.       5 

4  January       [819,     "      114 

[See  I.  232,  237.      II.  21.      His    agri- 
cultural Address,  III.  II).] 
Nicholas,  Wilson  Caret,  Letters  to: 
25  November,  1814,    II.  593 

5  October,       1816,  III.     26 

'•  A  sound  Republican,  and  a  sincere 
friend  to  the  French  cause,  in  evei  v 
respect,"  I.  598,  599.  Accuses  Ham- 
ilton of  having  "  taken  the  Executive 
in  by  gaining  phrases,  of  which  he 
could  make  the  use  he  has  done."'  I. 
599.  [See  I.  108,  109,  152,  387,  583, 
586,591,598.  11.47.  IV.  151,  et  sea., 
199.] 

Nicholas,  Col.,  of  Albemarle,  I.  161. 

Nicholas.  Col.,  I.  384. 

Nicholson, ,  II.  158. 

Nile,  The,  Its  fertilizing  inundations, 
III.  82. 

Nilks.  Hezekiah,  Letter  to  : 
8  January,  1822,  IV.  558. 

Niks' 's  Weekly  Register,  IV.  7,  9.  Er- 
roneous ascription  to  .Madison,  of  a 
letter  dated  ''Richmond.  .March  23d., 
1836,"  IV.  432,  n. 

Noah,  Mordecai  M.,  Letter  to  : 
15  May,  1818,  III.  97. 
His  discourse  at  the  consecration   of 
the  Jewish  synagogue.  III.  97. 

Xoailles, .  II.  0:>. 

Non  importation  bills,  11.11,15.  IV.  199. 

Non-intercourse  with  G.  B.  and  France, 
II.  429.  430.  [See  II.  445,  451,  487, 
488.] 

Norfolk,  I.  156,  238.  III.  409.  A  port 
of  entry,  I.  87. 

"  Norfolk  Herald."  IV.  34. 

Isorth  American  Review,  111.300,309, 
515.     IV.  115.  117.  226,  230. 
North  Carolina  : 

The  Senate  and  Hodse  of  Commons  of 
the  General  Assembly  of  tue 
State  of  North  Carolina,  Letter  to  : 
L813,  11.577. 

The  General  Assembly  of  the  State 
of  North  <  Iarolina,  Letteb  to  : 

January,  1810,  II.  463. 
Rumor  that  a  Stale  lias  been  set  up  in 
the  back  country  of  N.  C,  I.  154.  A 
leader  in  the  rage  for  paper  money, 
243.  Suggested  explanation  of  her 
not  sending  Commissioners  to  Annap- 
olis, 246.  Rejects  the  Constitution, 
unless  on  conditions.  4 in.  Elections. 
II.   26,   550.      Proposes    twenty   six 


NOB— NUL] 


GENERAL    INDEX 


G4'J 


amendments  to  the  Constitution  U.  S., 
IV.  129.  [See  I.  187,  275,  357,  375, 
378,  107,  -l  15.  II.  II.  35,  67,  L52, 
463,  523,  577.  III.  .Ml.  552,  598,  640, 
Ctrl.     IV.  26,  190,  2-J.V] 

North  West  passage,  III.  626. 

Northern  Keck,  'flu.  Proprietary  inter- 
est, 1.  2<i!i.  Papers,  215.  Fscheat 
Laws.  219,  '-'-JO. 

Nokvell,  John,  III.  629,  630. 

Norwegian  >  olony,  III.  100,  101. 

Nullification.       [See      "  Jeffebson, 

Thomas,"  ■•  SOI  111  CAROLINA,"  ''  SOV- 
EREIGNTY," "Virginia  Resoli  rioNS."] 
Proceedings  of  the  Virginia  Li 
ture  in  1798  - '99,  erroneous!)  cited 
in  support  of  tbe  Nullifying  doctrine, 
IV.  72.  95,  Hil.  in;,.  106,  269  —  354. 
No  countenance  given  to  this  doctrine 
in  tin-  printed  Address  of  the  Virgin- 
ia Assembly  in  1798  to  tbe  People, 
nor  in  (be  printed  Debates  on  tbe 
Resolutions.  87,  105,  106.  The 
true  exposition  of  the  Virginia  Reso- 
lutions and  Report.  Debates  in  the 
H.  of  D.  :  Address  of  the  two  Hous- 
es :     Answers    by    other   States    to    1he 

Resolutions.  &c,  10 !.  105.  The  term 
'•  Nullification  "  in  the  Kentucky  Res- 
olutions belongs  to  those  of  1799, 
with  which  Jefferson  had  nothing  to 

do.  .-7.    The  doctrine  slated.  101,  107. 

'6'J'j.  its  import.  Its  effect  to  enable 
a  small  minority  of  States  to  give  the 
law  and  even  the  Constitution  to  a 
large  majority  :  thus  overturning  the 
firsi  principle  of  free  Government,  and 
in  practice  the  Government  itself, 
102.  395.  For  this  preposterous  and 
anarchical  pretension  there  is  not 
a  shadow  of  countenance  in  the  Con- 
stitution. With  such  a  deadly  poison 
in  it.  no  Constitution  could  he  sure 
of  lasting  a  year,  206,  -too.  Its  "hid- 
eous   aspect     and    fatal   tendency." 

But.  it  ••  lias  captivated  many  honest 
minds,"  117,  200.  Seems  to  be  gen- 
erally abandoned  in  Virginia,  196. 
Hope  that  those  who  now  see  iis  ab- 
surdity, will  see  also  the  necessity  id' 
rejecting  the  claim  to  effect  it  through 
the  State  Judiciaries,  which  can  be 
kept  in  their  Constitutional  career 
only  by  the  control  of  the  Federal 
jurisdiction,  196.  "  Nullification  theo- 
ry," 200.  A  heresy.  200,  367.  A  twin 
heresy  of  Secession,  2(ix.  The  Nulli- 
fiers  boldly  invoke  Jefferson's  author- 
ity, 2Uli,  207  ;  but  shut  their  eyes  and 


lips  whenever  ii  i>  ever  bo  clearly 
and  emphatically  against  them.  229. 
Untrue  complain!  that  the  judicial  au- 
thority of  r.  S.,  when  overruling  thai 
of  a  Siate.  is  subjecting  a  Sovereign 

Slate  to  the  will  of  a  <  oiirt  composed 
of  not  more  than  seven  individuals. 
'I  he  question  would  be  between  the 
authority  of  a  single  State  ami  the 
authority  of  a  tribunal  representing 
a.-  manj  States  as  compose  tbe  Union, 
206.  'the  Nullifiers  seek  to  impair 
Madison's  authority,  on  the  ground 
of  his  advanced  age  :  bui  profess  to 
rely  on  opinions  of  Jefferson  and 
Sumter,  expressed  when  they  were 
boih  older,  206.  A  Colossal  heresy, 
229.  Query  as  to  the  impossibility  of 
resisting  'the  Nullifying  inference 
from  the  doctrine  that  makes  the 
Siaie  Courts  uncontrollable  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.,  230.  At- 
tempted distinction  between  a  dele- 
gation and  a  surrender  of  power, 
merely  verbal  in  the  given  case.  290. 
Explicit  declaration  in  the  Constitu- 
tion of  U.  S..  that  il  and  the  laws  of 
U.  S.  shall  be  supreme  over  the  Con- 
stitution and  laws  of  the  several 
Slates;  supreme  in  their  exposition 
and  execution,  as  well  as  in  their  au- 
thority, 290.  Startling  idea  of  twen- 
ty Imir  expounders  of  a  rule  which 
cannot  exist  but  in  a  meaning  and 
operation  the  same  for  all,  290.  Its 
danger  and  evident  progress,  either  in 
its  original  shape  or  disguises  assum- 
ed. 357.  Has  the  effeel  of  putting 
powder  under  the  Constitution  and 
the  Union,  and  a  match  in  the  hand 
of  every  party  to  blow  them  up  at 
pleasure,  ;;.">7.  366,  367.  Is  propaga- 
ting itself  under  the  name  of  Stat'' 
Rights,  367.  Is  diminishing  the  im- 
portance of  questions  between  the 
Executive  and  other  departments  of 
the  Federal  Government,  compared 
with  questions  between  the  Federal 
and  State  Governments,  ami  inculca- 
ting- itself  as  tbe  only  safeguard  to 
the  hitler  against  the  former,  367. 
Resolutions  of  the  Virginia  Legisla- 
ture. January  2(1.  1833,  declaring  that 
S.  Carolina  was  not  supported  in  her 
doctrine  of  Nullification  by  the  Reso- 
lutions of  1798,  395,  410.  Led  to 
disguise  its  deformity  under  the  posi- 
tion that  a  single  Slate  may  rightfully 
resist  an  unconstitutional  and  tyran- 


650 


GENERAL     INDEX 


[  N  D  L  —  S  I   L 


nioal  law  of  U.  S.,  keeping  oul  ol 
view  the  essential  distinction  between 
a  constitutional  righl  and  the  Datura! 
and  universal  righl  of  resisting  intol- 
erable oppression,  395,  396.  Reme- 
dies againsl  usurpations  (if  power,  the 
same  under  the  Government  of  F.  S. 
as  under  all  oilier  Governments,  es. 
tablished  and  organized  on  free  prin- 
ciples, 417.    The  remedies  indicated, 

417,  418.  This  view  belongs  equally 
to  each  of  the  Slates,  417.  The  re- 
served rights   uf  every  citizen,    117. 

418.  Astonishing  boldness  of  the 
doctrine  that  ihe  Constitution  of  U.S. 
which,  as  such,  and  under  that  name, 
was  presented  to,  and  accepted  by 
those  who  ratified  it  ;  which  has  been 
so  deemed  and  so  called  by  those 
living  under  it,  for  nearly  half  a  cent- 
ury ,  and.  as  such,  sworn  to  by  every 
officer,  State,  as  well  as  Federal ;  is 
yet  no  Constitution,  but  a  treaty  or 
league,  or,  at  most,  a  Confederacy 
among  nations,  as  independent  and 
sovereign  to  each  other  as  before  the 
charter  which  calls  itself  a  Constitu- 
tion was  formed,  418.  No  appeal 
from  the  remedy  marked  out  by  the 
Constitution,  but  the  appeal  to  the 
parties  themselves,  having  an  author- 
ity above  the  Constitution,  or  to  the 
law  of  nature,  419.  Sophism,  be- 
cause an  unconstitutional  law  is  no 
law,  that  it  may  be  constitutionally 
disobeyed  by  all  who  think  il  uncon- 
stitutional, 419.  :No  distinction  la- 
ken  between  the  case  of  a  law  con- 
fessedly unconstitutional,  and  a   case 

turning  on  a  doubt  and  a  divided 
opinion.  11!).  Extent  of  the  preten- 
sion. Subversive  of  all  Constitutions, 
all  laws,  and  all  compacts,  419.  Con- 
stitution of  U.  S.  necessarily  the  off- 
spring of  a  Sovereign  authority,  419. 
Features  of  the  I  i-overnment  of  U.  S., 
41!).  420.  The  true  question,  whether 
a  single  State  has  a  Constitutional 
righl  to  annul  or  suspend  ihe  opera- 
tion of  a  law  of  U.S.  within  its  limits, 
the  Stale  remaining  a  member  of  Ihe 
Union,  and  admitting  the  Constitu- 
tion to  be  in  force,  '■'>'■)('>.  The  affirma- 
tion a  plain  contradiction  in  terms, 
and  a  fatal  inlet  to  anarchy.  397. 
Such  a  claim  not  expressly  guarded 
against,  because  a  pretension  so 
novel,  so  anomalous,  and  so  anarchi- 
cal, was  not,  and  could  not  be,  antic- 


ipated. 398.  The  claim  probably  ir- 
reconcilable with  tbee^ed  contempla- 
ted by  the  interposition  claimed  by 
ihe  3rd  Resolution  of  Virginia,  for 
the  parties  to  the  ( lonstitulion  :  and 
why.  398,  :!'J!).  The  slariling  conse- 
quences from  Ihe  claim  have  driven 
its  partisans  to  ihe  extravagant  pre- 
sumption that  no  State  would  be  so 
unjust.  Ac,  &C,  as  lo  avail  itself  of 
its  right  in  any  case  not  so  palpably 
just,  &c,  as  to  ensure  a  concurrence 
of    the   requisite   proportion    of    the 

others.  :;S)i).      In   such  a  case,    the    law 

would  never  have  been  passed,  or 
would  have  been  immediately  repeal- 
ed. 399.  The  presumption  comes 
from  S.  Carolina,  in  the  teeth  and  at 
the  lime  of  her  own  example.  o'.)!). 
Is  against  the  experience  of  Other 
countries  and  times,  and  that  among 
ourselves.  Examples  and  consequen- 
ces, 399.  li)0.  Manifest  from  the  3rd 
Va.  Resolution  that  the  adequate  in- 
terposition to  which  il  relates  must 
be  not,  a  single,  but  a  concurrent  in- 
terposition, 400.  The  7th  Va.  Reso- 
lution, Jin).  401.  The  Virginia  Re- 
port, explaining  and  vindicating  the 
Resolutions,  403—409.  The  claim  of 
a  Constitutional  right  in  a  single  Stale 
to  nullify  a  law  of  U.  S..  absurd  in  its 
naked  and  suicidal  form,  409.  Modi- 
fied by  S.  Carolina  into  a  right  in 
every  State  to  resist  within  itself  the 
execution    of    a    Federal    law  deemed 

by  it  io  be  unconstitutional,  and  to 
demand  a  Convention  of  the  States  to 
decide  the  question  of  Constitutional- 
ity :  the  annulment  of  ihe  law  to 
continue  in  the  mean  time,  and  lo  be 
permanent  unless  three  fourths  of  the 
States  concur  in  overruling  the  annul- 
ment. 40!i.  Results  during  the  temp- 
orary nullification  of  a  law  the  same 
as  those  of  an  unqualified  Nullifica- 
tion. Illustrations.  409,  410.  The 
amount  of  this  modified  right  of  Nul- 
lification is,  that  a  single  State  may 
arrest  the  operation  of  a  law  of  F. 
S..  and  institute  a  process  which  is  to 
terminate  in  the  ascendency  of  a  mi- 
nority over  a  large  majority  in  a  Re- 
publican system,  the  characteristic 
rule  of  which  is.  that  the  major  will 
is  the  ruling  will.  -III).  Attempt  to 
father  the  new  tangled  theory  on 
Jefferson,  410.  His  meaning  rescued 
from  this  imputation  by  the  very  doc- 


X  U  L  —  O  V  F  ] 


G E N E RAL     INDEX. 


651 


nmeni    procured   from  his  files  and 
triumphantly  appealed  to  by  the  Nul- 
lifies, 410.     In  this  document  the  re- 
medial  rigbl   lit'  Nullification    is   ex- 
pressly called  a  natural   right,  ami. 
consequently,    a    righl    derived    urn 
from  the.  ( lonstitntion,  bul  from  abus- 
es ami  usurpations  releasing  the  par- 
ties t"  ii    from   their  obligation,  I  lo. 
Value  allowed  to  Jefferson's  authority 
by  the  Nullifying  party,  while  they 
disregard  his  repeated  assertions  of 
the  Federal  authority,  even  under  the 
Articles  of  Confederation,  to  stop  the 
commerce    of    a    refractory    Slate  : 
while   they  abhor   his   opinions   ami 
propositions   on    Hie   subject  of  Sla- 
very;   ami   overlook  his  declaration 
that  iu  a  Republic  it  is  a  vital  princi- 
ple  that   the  minority  must  yield  to 
the  majority,  -till.//,   their  zeal  guilty 
of  the  subterfuge  of  dropping  a  part 
of   his   language,   which    shows    his 
meaning   to    be   entirely  at  variance 
with  the  nullifying  construction,  HO, 
411.  //.     Alleged  instancesof  success- 
ful Nullification  by  particular  States. 
Explanation  and  comment,  -til.     The 
States    which    have    exposed    them- 
selves to  the  charge  id'  Nullification, 
have,   except  S.  Carolina,  disclaimed 
it  as  a  Constitutional  rigid:  and  have 
moreover  protested  against  ir.  us  modi- 
fied  by    the    process   of   S.  Carolina, 
•ill.    412.     This    modified   claim   has 
scarce   an  advocate  out  of  the  State 
of  S.  C.  ami  owes  the  remnant  of  its 
popularity  there  to  the  disguise  under 
which  it  is  now  kept  alive,  4 14.     An 
anomalous   conceit,   415.      Its    main 
pillar  the  assumption  that  sovereign- 
ty is  an  unit  at  once  indivisible  and 
unalienable,  319.      [See  IV.  Gj.  66, 
si,  95,  'J:!!.  354.     IV.  .r)(i8.] 

NUTTALL,  Mil.  ,  III.  570. 


Oak  3iU,  IV.  170. 
Oaths,  Test,  I.  358. 
O'Brien,    Caft., 


His    claim 


against  U.  S.,  III.  147. 

"  Observator,  who  is  manifestly  Hamil- 
ton," II.  162. 

Observatory, 

Office.  [See  "  Armstrong,  Gex. 
Joux."  "  Executive  Department," 
"  President  of  U.  S.,"  "  Senate  of  U 


S."]  Onion  of  different  offices  in  one 
person,  I.  183.  Appointments  to 
office,  189,  L90,  ltd.  A  difficulty 
suggested  as  in  making  appointments? 
to  offices  without  a  Senate,  in  case  oi 

resignations  prior  to  the  close  of  a. 
Presidential  term.  1 1.  170.  Questions 
as  to  qualifications  for  office.  [See  jl. 
576,  577.  111.  5,  6.J  Heads  of  De- 
partments allowed  to  select  their 
own  clerks,  III.  26.  The  law  termin- 
ating appointments  at  periods  of  lour 
years,  pregnant  with  mischiefs.  Ob- 
jections to  it,  196.  As  to  its  Consti- 
tutionality, L96,  200,  202.  IV.  343. 
Territorial  precedents,  II.  202,  270. 
Appointments  to  original  vacancies 
in  the  recess  of  the  Senate.  [11.269, 
270,  319.  Practice  in  the  House  of 
<  'ominous  with  respect  to  filling  mili- 
tary vacancies  in  certain  cases,  270. 
In    appointments    to    office,  locality 

should  not  lie  allowed  to  give  exclu- 
sive claims  to  offices  of  general  con- 
cern, 433.  Question  whether  a  pub- 
lic minister  be  an  officer  in  the  strict 
constitutional  sense.  268.  Why  he  is 
not  so,  IV.  350.  The  place  of"  a  for- 
eign [public]  Minister  or  Consul  is  to 
be  viewed  as  created  by  the  law  of 
nations  to  which  the  U.  S.,  as  an  inde- 
pendent nation,  are  a  party  :  and  as 
always  open  for  the  proper  functiona- 
ries, when  sent  by  the  constituted  au- 
thority of  one  nation,  and  received. 
by  that  of  another.  350,  351,  370.  The 
Constitution,  in  providing  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  such  functionaries,  pre- 
supposes this  mode  of  intercourse  as 
a,  branch  of  the  law  of  nations,  351. 
Odium  justly  attached  to  the  princi- 
ple that  offices  and  emoluments  ai'e 
the  --spoils  of  victory,  the  personal 
property  of  the  successful  candidate 
for  the  Presidency,  to  be  given  as 
rewards  for  electioneering  services, 
and  in  general  to  be  used  as  the 
means  of  rewarding  those  who  sup- 
port, and  of  punishing  those  who  do 
not  support,  the  dispenser  of  the 
fund."  :;.">(i.  "The  principle,  if  avow- 
ed without  the  practice,  or  practised 
without  the  avowal,  could  not  fail 
to  degrade  any  administration  :  both 
together,  completely  so,"  357.  The 
mode  of  appointing  to.  and  removing 
from,  office,  a  fundamental  in  a  free 
Government:  and  ought  to  be  fixed 
by  the  Constitution.  3fc5.     An  uni'ore- 


G52 


GENERAL     INI)  E  X  . 


[01    K  --  P  A  B 


seen  multiplication  of  offices,  may 
add  a  weight  to  the  Executive  scale, 
disturbing  the  equilibrium  of  the 
Government,  385.  Desirable  thai  the 
evil  should  be  guarded  against  i>\ 
Legislative  regulation,  or,  it  necessa- 
ry, by  an  amendment  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, when  a  lucid  interval  of  party 
excitement  shall  invite  the  experi- 
ment, 385,  386. 

Ohio.  State  of,  II  513.  III.  111.  Bill 
providing  far  common  Scools,  316. 
banker  to  the  fund  provided  by  Con- 
gress in  aid  of  public  instruction  in 
Ohio,  317.  Anniversary  of  her  first 
settlement  in  1788, 1V.;;77.  Her  rapid 
growth  under  the  nurturing  protec- 
tion   of    the   Federal    councils,    377. 

Ohio  river.  44(i. 

Olive,  culture  of  the,  III.  205. 

Ompteda,  ■ .  II.  243. 

Oms,  Luis  de,  Minister  from  Spain,  II. 
459.     III.  21,  22,  34,  47),  117. 

Ontario.  Lake,  II.  580. 

Opossum,  'rim.  i.  2:; i.  363. 

Orders  in  Council.  [See  "  Great  Brit- 
ain.'" 

Ordinance  of  17s7.  interdicting-  Slavery. 
N.  W.  of  the  Ohio.  III.  154.  155,  1U5*. 

"  Ordonnances  Marines,"  1.  14(5. 

Osborne,  ,  I  451. 

Orleans.  Commissioners  to  officers  of 
the  Territory  of  Orleans.  J  I.  20  1. 

Oswald.  Richard,  British  Commission- 
er to  negotiate  peace,  I.  (il. 

"  Oswald  of  Philadelphia,"  I.  309. 

Otis.  George  A..  Letters  to: 
3  July,  1820,  III.  177 

2!)  December,     ••         "      201 
January,     1821,    "      203 
His  translation  of  Botta's  history,  III. 
201,  203. 

Outfit,  question  of,  I.  41!),  422,  4G0. 
[See  II.  192.] 

Owen,  Robert,  His  panacea  for  the 

evils  caused  1  > \  vicissiludes  in  the 
price  of  subsistence  and  in  thai  of 
labor.  III.  5711.  577  578. 
Ox.  The,  compared  with  the  Horse, 
as  animals  used  in  husbandry,  III.  89 
—91.  [See  111.  115,  1G7,  520.  IV. 
404,  n.] 


Paca.    ,  I.  356. 

"  Pacific,  The.-  Return  of.  II.  413. 
"Pacificus,"   on    President   Washing 


ion'-  Proclamation  of  Neutrality,  I. 
590,  591.  IV.  84.  His 
attempts  to  explain  away  and  dissolve 
the  Treaty  with  France,  508.  Includ- 
ed in  the  2nd  edition  of'  "  The  Feder- 
alist," 111.  58,  59. 

Page,  Francis,  Letter  to  : 

7  November,  1833.  IV.  323. 
Collector  at  Yorktown.  II.  436. 

Pack.  John.  I,  387,  453,  458,  479. 

Page,  Mann,  1.  232,  237,  23'.),  356, 
387. 

Page, ,  I.  223.     II.  172. 

Pahlen,  Codnt  de,  Minister  from  Rus- 
sia to  U.  S..  II.  516. 

Paine,  Elijah,  II.  20. 

Patne,  Thomas,  Letter  to  : 
20  August.  1803,  II.  185. 
Failure  of  efforts  in  the  Legislature 
of  Virginia  for  his  benefit,  I.  85,  Mi. 
89.  His  political  merits,  86.  His  an- 
swer to  Burke,  534,  535,  537.  [See 
I.  540.  575.  II.  84.]  His  rancour 
against  Washington,  II.  72,74.  His 
"severe  letter."  to  Washington.  91. 
His  letter  to  the  French  People  and 
Annies.  131. 

I'm, iima  miss'mn.  III.  540. 

Panmi.l,   McRae  &  Pollard,  Letter 
to  Captains  : 
28  June,  1823,  III.  32S. 

Paper,  as  a  circulating  medium.  II. 
591.     HI.  166,  549. 

Paper  money,  "  Etch"  for.  1.  2 is.  239. 
Genera]  rage  for  it.  243,  2  11.  2  15. 
Notes  id"  .Madison's  Speech  ill  II.  1>. 
in  opposition  to  it,  255  257.  An  ob- 
stacle to  the  assumption  of  the  State 
debts.  513.  [See  1.  251.  252.  253, 
25  1.  260,  2C5,  267,  292,  318,  332,  334. 
339,  o.'uk     III.  193.] 

Papoon,  Benjamin  F..  Letter  to  : 
18  May,  1833,  IV.  297. 

Paradise,  Mr.,  I.  230,  .17.  389. 

Paraguay,  III.  215. 

Pardons.  Objection  to  the  prohibition 
of  them,  in  Jefferson's  '■  draught  of  a 
Constitution     lor   Virginia,"   I.   189. 

Conditional  pardons  in  certain  cases 
authorized  bv  a  law  of  Virginia, 
215. 

PargacoJa  [  '.'  ]  river,  II.  100. 
Paris,  Peact  of,  in  1815,  HI.  3 

Parish,  Mr,, .  II  477. 

Parish  priest.  Objection  to  annexing  a 

legal  salary  to  the  title.  1.  L59,  160. 
Parker,  Daniel,  Chief  Clerk  of  the  War 

Department,  111.  387,  388,  126.  Ad- 
jutant and  Inspector  General,  583. 


PAII    —11.  X  ] 


G KNEE AL     INDEX. 


653 


Parker,  Jok  ith  in,  I.  158. 

Parker,  Richard,  A  judge  of  the  Dis- 
trict •  'miii  <it'  Virginia,  I.  378. 

Parker,  Gen.,  [Thomaa  '.'  ]  III.  110. 

Pare  r,  <  !ol., ,  IV.  L55 

r  tary    Law     Question  as   to 

effect  of  a  bill  which  lias  pa-scd  both 
Houses  of  a  Legislature  but  not  en- 
rolled, &c,  1.  132,  L33,  I  10. 

Parties.  In  every  political  Society 
thej  are  una\ oidable,  IV.  169.  Tran- 
sient causes  and  permanent  founda- 
tion Of  parties  in  tree  Slates.  111. 
ill.  N-.  A  new  door  for  them  in 
U.  S.,  II-.  A  natural  ofispring  of 
freedom,  IV.  24.  Three  periods  to 
which  the  most  interesting  stale  of 
parties     in    U.    S.    may    be    referred  : 

1.  That  of  the  War  of  Independ- 
ence. '.'.  That  of  the  adoption  of 
the  Federal  Constitution.  3.  Thai  of 
the  discussions  growing  out  of  the 
administration  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, 181,  l  12.  The  Anti-Repub- 
lican and  the  Republican  party,  lsJ. 
Dangi  r  of  parties  founded  on  Geo- 
graphical boundaries  and  other  physi- 
cal and  permanent  distinctions  hap- 
pening to  co-incide  with  them.  III. 
142,  157,  164,  199.  The  Federal  and 
Republican  parlies  contradistinguish- 
ed, 318,  325. 

Party  spirit,  III.  270,  442.  540,  565, 
601.  IV.  347.  Spirit  and  style  of 
partisan  gazettes,  injurious  to  the  Re- 
publican character.  Ac,  603. 

Pascal,  Bi  use,  His  "  Provincial  Tet- 
ters." I.  l  tii.  His  apology  for  the 
length  of  one  of  them.  HI.  262. 

Paterson,  William,  a  Senator  from 
the  State  of  New  Jersey,  I.  139. 

Patterson,  Captain  Daniel  D.,  III. 
24. 

Patterson,  William,  An  Associate 
Justice  of  U.  S.  S.  C.,  II.  84. 

Patterson,  Professor, ,  III.  596. 

Patton,  [?Paton,  or  Patten,]  II.  26, 
99.  101. 

Patton,  John  M.,  Letter  to  : 
24  March.  L834,  IV.  342. 
His  political  MS.,  IV.  143,  144.     [See 
IV.    27D.    271.    272.    348,    389.]     His 
Speech  on  the  "Virginia  Resolutions" 
of  made  in  11.  R. 

3d  March.  1834.  IV.  342. 

Paul,  Dit..  II.  2G0. 

Paulding,  James  K.,  Letters  to  : 
24  July,         1818,  III.     99 
10  March,      1827,    "     567 


April,        1831,  IV.  172 

April.  •■         ••  173 

6  June,  ••       ■'  182 

27  June,  "        "      L82 

January.    L832,     '*  21  1 

His    Biographical    undertaking,    IV 

173. 

Pauperism,  111.  162. 
Peace,  Favorable  evidence  on  the  side 

of,  L61.  62. 
Pearl  river,  II.  180. 
Peccan  nuts,  I.  234,  333. 
Pedometer,  I.  231. 

Pembeb  roN,  J  wils.  I.  5  12. 
Pendleton,  Edmund,  Letters  to: 

3  October,        1780,  I.    34 

10  October,  "  "     35 

1  I  November,      "  "     37 

21  November,      "  •'     38 
5  December,        "  "     39 

December,       "  "     40 

23  January,       1781,  "    41 
February,        "  "    42 

18  September,     "  "    51 

2  October,         "  "    52 

9  October,         "  "    52 

160ctober,  "  "     54 

27  November,      "  "    56 

11  December.  "  "       57 

25  December,       "  "     58 

9  January,       1787,  "  209 

24  February,        "  "  278 

22  April,  '  "  "  316 
■11  May,  "  "  328 
2tt  September,     "  "  340 

28  October,  "  "  358 
21  February,      1788,  "  381 

:;  March,  ••  "  382 

20  October,  "  "  428 

8  April,  1789,  '•  461 
1!»  April,  "  "  464 
17  May,                 "  "  470 

21  June,  "  "  477 
15  July,               "  "  487 

14  September,      "  "  491 

23  September,      "  "  492 
4  April,            1790.  "  514 

13  April,  "  "  517 

2  May,  "  "  518 

22  June,              '•  '•  520 
2  January,        1791,  "  523 

13  February,       "  •'  528 

15  December,  "  "  543 
21  January,  171)2,  "  545 
21  February,        "  "  548 

25  March,  "  "  549 

9  April.  "  "  552 

16  November,  "  "  571 
6  December,         "  "  572 


654 


( ;  E N E R A  L    INDEX 


[  p  E  \  —  r  )i  B 


10  December,    1792.    "  573 
23  February,      L793,     "  574 
8  January,       L795,    II.    30 
7  February,     1796,     "     77 
His  remarks  on   the  Judiciary   bill, 
and  opinion  of  the  power  of  removal, 
I.  487.      His  opinion  on  u  Bank  of  U. 
S.,  528.    His  observations  od  the  I   li- 
nage Tax.  II.  77.     Letters  from  him, 

III.  632.  His  observations  on  the  -lu- 
dicial  Bill,  before  the  Senate  in  L789, 
do  not  touch  the  section  which  gives 
to  Supreme  Court  U.  S.  its  controll- 
ing jurisdiction,  over  the  State  Judic- 
iaries. IV.  197.  198.  Would  have 
proposed  a  Federal  use  of  the  Slate 
Courts,  with  an  appeal  from  the  Su- 
preme Courts  of  the  States  to  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  [T.  S..  198,  230.  In- 
ternal evidence  that  ■'  The  danger  not 
over"'  was  written  by  him  singly, 
412.  [See  I.  L22,  L99,  261,  271.  273, 
387,   398,   595,   597.      III.   278.   580. 

IV.  48.] 

Pendleton,  -  ,  Chancellor  of  Vir- 
ginia. T.  356,  430. 

Pendleton,  Col..  I.  209. 

Pendleton,  Mr.,  I.  152. 

Pendleton,  Judge  II..  of  S.  C,  III. 
612. 

Pendleton,  Judge,  IV.  36. 

Penitentiaries,  III.  632. 

Penn,  William,  His  admirable  prin- 
ciples and  institutions,  III.  535,  552, 
553.  He  "subdued  the  ferocity  of 
savages  l>y  his  virtues,  and  enlighten- 
ed the  civilized  world  by  his  institu- 
tions," IV.  118. 

Pennsylvania  : 

Letter  to  the  Republican  Citizens  of 
the  First  <  Jongressional  District  of  ; 

21  February,  1810, 11.471 
Opinions  in  Penn.  concerning  Relig- 
ious liberty,  I.  11.  Her  effort  for  the 
Western  commerce.  73.  Her  duties 
on  foreign  goods  and  tonnage.  L97. 
A  leader  in  the  rage  for  paper  money, 
243.  A  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  P.,  359.  [See  ■'  Western 
Insurrection."]     Elections  in,  II.  25. 

26,  60.  Project  to  disfranchise  the 
insurgent  counties,  29.  Exclusive 
vote  against  their  representatives  and 
Senators,  31.  Resolutions  of  the  Leg- 
islature, assuming  the  existence  of 
authority  in  the  federal  Executive  to 
prevent  the  execution  of  a  decree 
sanctioned  bj  the  Supreme  Court  of 
U.  S.,  438,  439.    Her  final  acquies- 


cence in  the  authority  of  the  Federal 
Judiciary.  IV.  112.  [See  I.  120.  183, 
217.  275,  356,  370,  377.  I  10.  II.  8 3. 
103,  163.  164,  175.  438,  171,  480,  550. 

III.  308,  544,  :>si,  5-5.  639,  646.  IV, 
64,  65,  108,  1-7.  17ii.  24  I.  251,  254, 
255,] 

icola,  III.  21,  25.  589,  596. 

CER,    II.  530,  531 .  '■'■'!. 
Quackeries  and  corruptions  of  his  ad- 
ministration, 1L  460.      His  assassina- 
tion. 536. 
Perdido,  III.  596. 
Pernambuco,  II I.  45 
Perpetuities.  5(17.  56o. 
Persons,  Bv jhts  of,  IV.  22.    I.  187.  188. 

IV.  22. 

Perry,  Cut.  Oliver  H..  III.  387,  380, 
390,  392,  393. 
Peru,  III.  516. 

Peters,  Richard,  Judge  of  U.  S.  Dis- 
trict  <  !oi  rt,  Letters  to  . 
5  September,   1807.     If.  408 
ir>  August,         1818,    III.  108 
22  February,     1819,     "     II*-* 
22  February,     1823,     "     301 
1  December,     1824,     "     473 
8  September,    1826,     "     527 
[See  III.  580.] 
Peter's  mountain,  III.  225. 
Petersburg,  Va„  HI.  328,  139. 
Petition, Rigid  of,  IV.  426. 
Petry, — ,  French  Consul  at  Phila- 
delphia. II.  4. 
Peyster,  Frederick,  Letter  to  : 

1833,  IV.  325. 
Peyton,  Grymes,  and  others,  Letter 

to:     1835,  IV.  389. 
Ph  iii'-iit.  111.  67. 

Philadelphia,  the  Surviving  Military 
Characters  of  the  late  Revolution- 
ary Army  ami  Navy,  residing  ix  the 
City  and  County  of,  Letter  to  : 

January.  1810,  II.  464. 
Proceedings    concerning    tea.    I.    10. 
Malignant  fever,  602.     Public  meet- 
ing, II.  ."-.  65,  66.   I'hila.  Gazette,  114. 
Surviving    military   characters.    &c., 
464.     Society  Of  Arts.  490.     Natural- 
ized citizens.  557.     [See    I.    156,    191, 
356,  539,  553,  601.      IV.  L68.     II.  95. 
III.  I  io.    See  "Congress."] 
Piiii.tr  OF  MacEDON,  L  206,  227.  296. 
Philology.      [See  "  LANGUAGE."] 

Philosophy,  ••  Experiment  and  com- 
parison may  be  regarded  as  its  two 
eyes,"  III.  <i20. 

Phosphoretic  Matches,  I.  145 

Phrenology,  III.  501.  505. 


II.  l'OL] 


G  EN  i;  l;  A  I.     I  N  DEX 


655 


I'm  HON,  M.,  I. in  i  i:  in  : 
:;  September,  1804.  II.  204. 
[See  II.  182,  L86,  188,  197,  204,  571.] 

Pickering,  Timothy,  II.  59,  CO,  64,  72 
7  I.  84,  91,  L02,  115,  126,  1  16,  151, 
512.  Secretary  of  State,  67,  82.  His 
dismission  by  President  Adams,  195. 
lh-  apocrj  phal  tradition  respecting 
the  Declaration  of  Independence,  II  I. 
336. 

••  Pickering's  Statutes  at  large"  II.  31  I. 

Picket,  Albert,  and  others,  Lktteu  to  : 
September,  1821,  111.  2:12. 

Pierce,  Major,  ,  His  notes  in 

the  Federal  <  Convention,  I  V.  L39. 

Pike,  Gen.  Zebi  lon  SI.,  His  character 
and  merits,  IV.  159. 

•■  Pilgri;  s,  The"  Their  "exalt- 

ed feelings,"  "heroic   virtues,"  &c, 
IV.  372. 

PiNCKNET,  Chari.es,  A  Delegate  from 
S.<  Carolina  to  the  Federal  Convention, 
1.282.  Minister  to  Spain.  His  recall 
asked  by  the  Spanish  Government. 
lli>  agencj  faulty  and  feeble,  II.  209. 
Identities  in  a  plan  of  <  lovernmenl 
proposed  by  him  in  the  Federal  Con- 
vention, as  published  in  the  Journal, 
with  the  texl  of  the  Constitution  as 
finally  agreed  to  IV.  172.  His  "Ob- 
servations "  on  it,  172,  173,  181,  is:'. 
183,  203,  378.  Draught  sent  by  bim 
to  J.  Q.  Adams,  and  printed  in  the 
Journal  of  the  Convention,  is  no!  the 
same  with  thai  presented  by  P.  to  t lie 
Convention,  29  Maj  1787,  201,  202, 
203,  338,  339,  378,  379,  380.  Discrep- 
ancies between  the  plan  as  furnished 
by  him  to  J.  Q.  Adams,  and  the  plan. 
presented  to  the  Convention,  as  de- 
scribed in  P's  pamphlet,  379.  [Seel. 
440.     H.  3,  186,  208,  210.] 

Pincknet,  Gen.  Charles  Cotesworth, 
A  Delegate  from  S,  Carolina,  to  tbe 
Federal  Convention,  I.  281.     [See  li. 

III,  113.] 

Pincknet,  Thomas,  Minister  to  Eng- 
land. I.  1  15.  Extracl  of  a  letter  from 
him  in  Jefferson,  Secretary  of  State. 
H.  315.  [See  II.  86,  105,  107.  ins. 
309.      III.    388,    392,    398,    399,    401. 

IV,  488.] 

Pincknet,  ■ .  His  pamphlet,  and  ••  a 

printed  sheet  containing  his  ideas  on 
a  Very  delicate  subject,"  A.C.  1.  342. 

Pinknet,  William,  Letters  to: 
9  November,    1808,  II.  425 
;")  December,      "        "    427 

11  February,      1809,   "    42U 


20  January,       L810,   il.   168 
23  May,    *  "       "     1 7 1 

:;n  October,  "  "  485 
29  January,  1814,  "  581 
U.  S.  Commissioner  under  Treaty  of 
1794  with  <;.  ];..  n.  in:;.  22:;.' 22-1. 
508.  III.  I  13,  I  1 1.  Minister  of  I'.  S. 
at  London,  II.  103,  405,  Ha;.  A  pri- 
vate letter  from  him  communicated  i<> 

I  Congress,  426.  His  merits  in  relation 
to  . I ; i \  's  Treaty,  III.  ■">■">:;.  55  I.  lli- 
\  iew  of  F.  .1.  Jackson's  case,  II.  17 !. 
His  qualifications  and  services,  48G. 
Resigns  the  office  of  Attorney  Gener- 
al, 581.  .Minister  to  Russia,  HI.  3. 
[See  II.  437,  443,  152,  153,  467,  17.".. 
478,  484,  189,  493,  .">!•">.  :>I7.  III.  34, 
485.    See  "  Wheaton.  Henrt,"] 

Piper,  William.  IV,  212. 

Piracy.      [Si Ferranb."]    An  of- 

fence  defined  by  the  law  of  nations, 
and  cannot  he  varied  by  any  particu- 
lar nation,  II.  211. 

Pitkin,  Timothy.  His  ••  Political  and 
civil  History  of  the  United  States." 

Pitt,  William,  1.  340.  11.  12,  :;:>.  399, 
inn.     IV.  186,  493. 

Pittsburg.  Great  agitation  there  caus- 
ed by  the  reported  intention  of  Con- 
gress  concerning  the  Mississippi,  1. 
283. 

Plants,  number  of  kinds  of,  HI.  68,  69, 
72.     [See  III.  158,  197,  198.] 

Plattsburg,  III.  :;'.'«;.  416. 

Pleasants,  James,  Governor  of  Vir- 
ginia. HI.  518. 

Pleasants,  Robert,  Lktteu  to  : 
:i()  October,  1791.  I.  542. 

Ploughs,  I.  :>77.  580,  586,  589. 

PldmER,   William.   GOVERNOR   OF  New 

II  lmpshire,  Letters  to  : 
10  August.  1818,  III.  1H7 
20  June.       1819,    '•     138 

i'i  i  m  k.  William  Jr.,  Letter  to  : 

I  1  July,  1815.  II.  0(17. 
His  purpose  of  writing  a  history  of 
the  War  of  1812,  II.  607,  608. 

Pocahontas,  IV.  302. 

Poetry.  An  "  offspring  of  the  Senator- 
ial muse  "  "not  even  prose  run  mad," 
II.  148. 

Point  Coupe.  I.  97.     II.  218,  542. 

Poland,  I.  :;:>2.    IV.  in:;. 

■■  Political  Economist,"  III.  1 10. 

Political  Economy,  HI.  140.  [See 
••  Malthus,  Rev.  'I'.  R.,"  "  Manufac- 
tures." '•  Tariff,"  ••  Tax,"  &c..]  Ev- 
ery populous  country  is  liable  to 
contingencies    that    niusl    distress   a 


G5G 


GENERAL    INDEX.  [pol-fkk 


portion    of    its   inhabitants,   III.  576. 
<  'hid  causes  of  them,  Ibid. 

■•  Political  (  >bserv  moNS."  [See  "<  !om- 
meucial    Resolutions."]     IV.    186 
502.     Defence   of    the  "  ( lommercial 
Resolutions,"    486    -  502.      See   III. 
327,  328,  559,  595.] 

Political  opinions.  I.  277,  278. 

Political  pamphlets,  Noticesof,  I.  8,  17, 
el.  seq. 

Politics,  [See  "Compact,"  "Consti- 
tution of  I".  S.,"  &c,  &c]  Practical 
character  of  an  appeal  to  the  People 
on  an}  pending  measure,  II.  100.  lm- 
provements  in  political  science:  The 
combination  of  the  Federal  and  Rep- 
resentative principles,  [II.  633.  Sour- 
ces of  oppression  in  different  forms 
of  Government,  IV.  22,  23,  50,  51.  A 
political  system  thai  does  not  provide 
for  a  peaceable  and  effectual  decision 
of  all  controversies,  arising-  among 
the  parlies  is  noi  a  Government,  but 
a  mere  Treaty  between  iudependenl 
nations,  without  any  resort  for  termi- 
nating disputes  but  negotiation,  and. 
that  failing,  the  sword,  47.  [See  JV. 
138,  139.] 

Pollard.  Mil,  IV.  36,  48. 

POLYBIUS,   I.  347. 

Pomeroy,  Samuel  W.,  Letters  to  : 
February,  1820,  111.  107 
23  June.  1821,    "     225 

Ponckartrain,  Lake.  II.  180. 

Pope  of  Borne.  His  bull  dividing  the 
world  of  Discovery  between  the  Span- 
iards and  the  Portuguese,  IV.  114. 

Population.  11.209  —  216.  Plenum 
of,  among  the  Indians.  III.  67.  Ten- 
dency to  excessive  multiplication.  72. 
Of  U.  S.,  212,  213,  214.  215,  241. 
American  Essay  on  P.  combating  the 
Theory  of  Malthus,  348.  Constant 
tendency  of  an  increase  of  popula- 
tion, alter  the  increase  of  food  lias 
reached  its  term,  .">77.  Ratio  of  in- 
crease of  population  in  U.  S..  IV.  29, 
30.  In  G.  1!.  and  in  Ireland.  92. 
Power,  in  both  the  vegetable  and  an- 
imal kingdoms,  of  every  species  to 
multiply  itself,  454.  Purposes  of  this 
ordinance  of  nature.  -).">4. 

■•  Popi  i.ation  and  Emigration,"  IV. 
454  —  158. 

Port  Bill.  I.  157,  207,  217,  222,  232. 
238,  261,  265,  366. 

Port  Royal,  I.  488 

Porter,  Charles,  I.  80. 

Porter,  Cam.,  II.  453.    III.  9. 


Porter,  Commodore,  III.  20. 

Porto  Rico,  III.  340. 

Portugal.  Agrees  to  shut  her  porta 
again  i  English  prizes,  I.  39.  Pamph- 
lets on  the  Portuguese  question,  I V. 
93,  94.  [See  I.  .,7.;.  ||.  ill.  265. 
III.  15,  189,  336,  605,  618.  619.  IV. 
.".17.  503,  504.] 

Post.    II.  28,  62.     111.  623,  624. 

Post  ma, Is.     II.  89.     III.  56.     IV.   147. 

Potatoe,  handy  traced  in  its  indige- 
nous stale.  IU.  7.">. 

Poltomac  Company,  I.  175. 

nac  river,  \.  1 18,  1 19,  120.  122. 
Scheme  for  opening  navigation  of  the. 
under  the  auspices  id'  General  Wash- 
ington, 90.  Progress  of  the  works  0n 
the  Potomac.  242. 

Potts, ,  II.  20. 

Poulson's  paper,  II.  493. 

Powell,  [  ?  John  Hare,  ]  III.  500. 

Potdras,  II.  479. 

Pradt,  Dominique  f>..  Ami:  de,  His 
••  Europe  for  1819,"  III.  177.  238. 

Prairie  '!"  Chien,  III.  407. 

Precedents.  Their  proper  force.  III. 
642,  656.  IV.  165,  183,  184.  Essen- 
tial difference  between  the  respect 
due  from  one  Legislature  to  laws 
passed  by  preceding  Legislatures, 
and  the  obligation  arising  from  judi- 
cial expositions  of  the  law  on 
succeeding  judges,  184.  Reasons 
why  Judicial  precedents  are  regarded 
as  having  authoritative  force  in  sett- 
ling the  meaning  of  a  law.  184.  A 
recognised  necessity  in  fact,  and  in 
common  understanding,  of  regarding 
a  course  of  practice,  thus  character- 
ized, in  the  light  of  a  legal  rule  id'  in- 
terpreting a  law.  185.  Analogous 
and  more  weighty  reasons  in  the  case 
of  a  Constitution,  bv">.  186.  Answer 
to  the  objection,  that  a  legislator  hav- 
ing sworn  to  support  the  Constitution 
must  support  it  in  his  own  construc- 
tion of  it,  however  different  from 
that  put  on  it  by  his  predecessors,  or 
whatever  be  the  consequences  of  the 
construction.  185.  Extraordinary  and 
peculiar  circumstances  controlling 
the  rule  in  both  cases.  The  duty,  in 
such  cases,  of"  the  most  ardent  theo- 
rist.'" 185,  186.  Fallacy  in  confound- 
ing a  question  whether  precedents 
(•an  expound  a  'Constitution,  with  a 
question  whether  they  can  alter  it 
211.  Effects  of  a  disregard  of  an 
thoritative  interpretations  of  the  Cod- 


P  B  I  ] 


G  B  X  E  R  A  I.     I  X  D  E  X  . 


057 


Btitution  of  TT.  P..  210.  Preposterous 
resulf  of  ill'-  doctrine  thai  an  ac 
knowl edged,  ;i  itnirorm,and  a  long  con- 
tinued practice  under  a  written  Con- 
BtiiutioD  and  law-  eannol  settle  1 1 1 « ■  i i- 
meaning,  _  in.  Answer  in  the  objection 
in  ihe  authority  of  Precedents  regular- 
ly continued  for  :'>.>  or  10  j  ears  thai 
tin-  ini"  character  of  a  political  sys- 
tem mighl  ii"i  be  disclosed  even  w  ith- 
in  sucb  a  period,  249.  Bad  prece 
dents.  495. 

Prentis,  Joseph,  A  Judge  of  ihe  Dis- 
trict Courl  of  Virginia,  I.  378. 

Prentis,  Mr.,  I.  262. 

3,  Ah;.,  II.  119. 

Prerogative.    "  Individual  '*    pre* 
live.'  IV.    , 

/'        r/o  lans,    I.    111.    154,    175,   213. 
III.  124. 

iption.  IV.  188. 

President  of  U.  S.  [See  "  Titles."] 
Till  I  concerning  election  of,  and  of  V. 
P.,  I.  548,  549.  Objections  to  it,  549. 
jjia  re-eligibility,  process  of  electing 
him,  and  powers  vested  in  him,  IV. 
66.  <  Injections  to  -l .  Hillhouse's  plan 
of  his  being  taken  from  the  roll  of 
Senators  alphabetically,  77  —  79. 
A  Presidential  contest  not  likely  to 
result  in  a  choice  that  will  discredit 
the  station,  7'.).  Relations  of  the 
Heads  of  Departments  to  him,  111. 
417  —  419.  Constitutional  provision 
respecting  the  presenting  of  Congress- 
ional Bills  to  him,  IV.  299,  300.  As 
t<>  his  power  to  appoint  Public  Minis- 
ters and  * '.in-iils  in  the  recess  of  the 
Senate,  350,  353.  The  question  to  be 
decided  is,  What  are  the  cases  in 
which  the  President  can  make  ap- 
pointments without  the  concurrence 
of  the  Senate'.'  and  it  turns  on  the 
construction  of  the  power  in  Art.  2. 
Sec.  3,  of  the  Constitution,  "  to  till  up 
all  vacancies  that  may  happen  during 
the  recess  ni  the  Senate,"  351 . 

Presidential  Election.  [See  11.  107, 
Hi!).  110.  III.  301.]  Third  election 
II.  116,  117.  Jockeyship,  106.  Iburth 
election.  L63,  164,  166,  L67,  171. 
Bronght  toH.R.  Passages  in  Jeffer- 
son's writings  concerning  .lame-  A. 
Bayard,  IV.  151,  158.  Bill  relating 
to  Electors  of  P.  and  V.  P.,  II.  157, 
158.  Ninth  Election,  Rivalship 
amonjr  members  of  Preident  Mon- 
roe's Cabinet,  III.  270.  Animated 
contest,  The  candidates  as  compared 
VOL.    IV.  42 


with  the  crowned  beads  of  Europe. 
331.  The  Presidential  Election  i"  be 
decided  i.\  II.  R.  in  1825,  478.  Tenth 
election,  '.Ml,  612,  613,  619,  620 
622,  623,  624,  625.  Prospect,  620, 
G  17.  Issue.  The  ■•  new  Palinui  lis  " 
661.  Circumstances  ami  causes  of 
ihe  adoption  of  the  existing  provision 
for  electing  a  President,  332,  3:;:;. 
Objections  to  it,  :;:;:'..  Election  of 
l'i esideutial  electoi  -  bj  Districts,  ;i 
proper  amendment,  334,  335,  357. 
A  joint  vote  of  ihe  two  Houses  of 
<  longress.  restricted  in  the  two  or 
three  highest  names,  ihe  preferable 
remedy  for  ihe  failure  of  a  majority 
id'  electoral  votes  for  any  one  candi- 
date, 334,  358,  361.  Query,  as  to 
making  a  plurality  of  votes  a  defini- 
tive appointment,  334,  335.  Object- 
ion to  nndistinguisbing  votes  for  I'. 
and  V.  P.,  335.  Sketch  of  a  sub8ti- 
tute  for  the  faulty  part,  in  question, 
of  ihe  Constitution,  335,  359,  361. 
Objections  to  a  re-assembling  of  the 
electors,  358,  361.  <  'au.se  of  ihe  equal- 
ity of  votes  in  the  election  of  1801, 
361. 

e   Tsle,  II.  580. 

Press,  The,  Query,  as  to  its  exemption 
from  liableness  in  every  case  of  true 
facts,  1.  II'-"'.  Ideal  remedy  for  the 
licentiousness  of  the.  III.  630. 
[See  I.  576.     III.  605,  lilS,  619.] 

Press  gang,  IV.  479. 

Preston,  Francis,  Letter  to  : 
2  June,  1823,  111.  320. 

Preston,  F.,  III.  38. 

Preston,  James,  Governor  ok  Virgin- 
ia, Letters to  : 
28  February,  1817,  IV.  556 
I  .March.  "        ••    557 

Preston,  William,  III.  38,  40. 

Preston,  — — ,  I.  577. 

Pbevost,  Sir  George,  II.  544.  III. 
393,  395,  404,  561. 

PltEVOST.  .  II.  4itl. 

Prices.  I.  32.  151.  156,  158.  151).  17(1. 
221,  228,  233.  262,  337.  389,  502,  529. 
II.  HI.  20,  28.  40.  61.  04,  70.  78,  80, 
87,  88.  105.  148.  221,  533.  III.  L91, 
1H5.  266,  331.  614,  616.     IV.  115,146. 

Pride,  Mm,  An  elector  of  P.  and  V. 
P.,  I.  157. 

Priestley,  Joseph,  His  answer  to 
Burke,  I.  534. 

PRINCE,  William,  I.  363. 

Princeton  College,  I.  4.    IV.  16a 

Private  Interests.  Their  evil  influences 


651 


G  E  N  E  R  A  L    I  X  D  E  X  . 


[  P  R  I  —  RAM 


mi    public   affairs,   I.   227,    325.     IV. 

(58,  (  '   >lntr. 

Privilege  of  Congress,  IV.  220.  The 
right  "I'  Belt-protection  in  the  dis- 
charge  of  necessary  duties  is  inherenl 
in  legislative  bodies,  221.  Abuse  of 
tin-  Privilege.  221. 

Proclamation  of  neutrality,  r.  581,  609. 
'■A  most  unfortunate  error,"  584,  585. 
An  explanatory  publication  a-  to  its 
■■  real  ob;ect,"  588.      [S '  IIi:i.vn>i- 

r-."     '•  PacIFHXS,"     '' RANDOLPH,      ED- 
MUND."] 

Procrastination,  IV.  305. 

Procrustes  and  the  Constitution  of  U. 

S.,  IV.  287. 

Proctor,  Gen., .  III.  392. 

Professions,   Mutual   relations  of    the 

knowledge    belonging    to    different, 

III.  157,158. 

'■  Property,"  IV.  478  —  480.  Rights 
of.  I.  181,  lsT.  IV.  3,  21,  22.  51, 
168.  Modifications  of  Government 
for  securing  it.  25,  26,  27.  Projecl  in 
Va.  for  making  property  a  tender  for 
debts  at  four-fifths  of  its  value,  I. 
268,  339.  Query,  as  to  the  future  in- 
fluence of  the  republican  laws  of  de- 
scent and  distribution,  in  equalizing 
the  property  of  the  citizens,  and  in 
reducing  to  the  minimum  mutual  sur- 
pluses for  mutual  supplies.  ]\".  30. 
Meaning  of  the  term  in  its  particular 
application,  and  in  its  larger  and 
juster  Bense,  478,  479.  Governmen 
instituted  to  protect  property  of 
every  sort,  478.  Examples  of  viola- 
tions of  the  duty.  ITS.  479.  The  rights 
of  property,  and  the  property  in 
rights.  479,  480. 

Protest  by  a  State,  in.  508,509. 

"  Providentia,  Case  of  the,''  II.  300. 
344,  391. 

Provisional  Army,  IT.  7. 

Prussia.  I.  57f).     IV  501. 

Public  accounts ,  I.  290. 

Public  Debt.  Plan  for  settling  the  do 
mestic  debt,  1  508.  Funding  bill, 
M9,  .020.  521.    Public  debt  iii  1783, 

IV.  448.    Plan  for  discharging 
ommended  bj  Congress,   148       452. 
Motives  of  justice,  good  faith,  honor. 
and    gratitude,    for    discharging    it. 
4f)2.    453.       The    general    classes    of 

creditors,  Tbid.    [See  I.  512,  516,  522. 
II.  31,  33,  35.     IV.  91,  155.] 
Public  Lands.     I.  290,  338,  525,  528. 
II.  87.  57(1.     III.   49.    136,    170,    614, 
615.     IV.  93,  213.     The  claim  of  new 


to  Federal  lands  within  their 
limits,  is  bo  unfair,  unjust,  contrary  to 
the  certain  &c.,  intentions  of  the  par- 
ti'-- to  the  case,  in  the  teeth  of  the 
condition  on  which  the  lands  were 
ci  ded  tn  the  Union,  thai  if  a  technical 
title  could  be  made  out  by  the  claim- 
ants, it  ought  in  conscience  and  honor 
to  be  waived,  187.  The  title  of  the 
United  States  rests  on  a  foundation 
too  just  and  solid  to  be  Bhaken  by 
technical  or  metaphysical  arguments, 
188,435.  The  known  and  acknowl- 
edged intention,-  of  the  parties  at  the 
time,  with  a  prescriptive  sanction  <>t' 
so  many  year.-,  consecrated  by  the  in- 
trinsic principles  of  equity,  would 
overrule  even  the  mosl  explicil  dec- 
larations and  terms,  1 : 3.  President 
Jackson's  retention  of  the  Land  Bill, 
March  I.  1833,  299,  ll.      Distri- 

bution of  the  public  lands,  435. 

Public  Minister.    [Si <  inn'i:."] 

■•  i'i  blic  Opinion,"  IV,  160.  When 
fixed  controls  the  most  arbitrary 
Government,  468.  Example  of  Tur- 
key, Ibid. 

"  Publicola,"  I.  537,  539, 

Pcfendorf,  Samuel,  Hi-  "  Law  of  Na- 
ture S."  I.  129.  II.  240  — 
243,  248,   251,    372. 

Purveyance,  [  1  ]  Mil,  II  186,  1  -7. 

Purviance,    Mr., ,  II.   210.   403, 

404,  406. 


Q. 


Quadrupeds.  Number  of  their  varie- 
ties, III.  67. 

Quakers.  Refuse  to  sign  the  Continen- 
tal Association,  I.  19.  In  Philadel- 
phia, for  the  new  Constitution,  35G. 
[See  I.  513.     II.  5.     IV.  337,  338.] 

Quarterly  Review,  III.  102,  300,  4.-7. 

Quebec,  II.  540.     IV.  114. 

•■  Quids,  The,"  11.  535. 

Quincy,  Josiah,  President  of  Harvard 
University.  IV.  35,  36. 

Quit  rent,  I.  209,  215. 

?.  Deficiences  of  payments  by 
the  States,  under  calls  from  Congress, 
I.  226. 


R 

Raleigh,  X.  C.  IV.  190. 
Ramsay,  Dr.  David,  Letter  to 
2  i  September,  1809,  II.  454 


1.    A    V   ] 


G  EN  i:  i:  AL    I  N  D  E  X 


Coy 


17  81 , 

1.     43 

1784, 

••     66 

]  7.-5. 

'«   135 

•■     I.V.I 

1788, 

••  385 

•■ 

••    ,38 

L789, 

••  450 

"  4G3 

•• 

•■  467 

" 

••   473 

" 

••  476 

ii 

"  479 

" 

"  488 

CI 

"    190 

1790, 

''  511 

••  512 

••  513 

ii 

•■  518 

1792, 

••  569 

Bis  Historj  of  tJ.  S.  and  of  the  Amer- 
ican Rei olution,  II I.  205.  IV.  558. 
Contests  the  election  of  W.  Smith  of 
s.  ( '.  in  <  longress,  on  a  question  aris- 
ing t.ui  of  the  Social  compact,  392. 
[See  i.  1 13.] 

I;  lmkai  .  —    .Hi-  oration,  II.  157. 

If  wimi.i,  &  \Vmii\i  v.  ( !ase  of,  11.7  1. 

]f.\MM.i.rii.  1 1 1 •  \i I  \i>.  I.i.i  rEBSTO  : 

I  May, 
1"  March, 
10  March, 
26  July, 
10  April, 
ovemher 

l  March, 
12  April, 
10  May, 
3]  May, 
J7  June, 
•J  l  June, 

15  July, 

21  August, 

1  l  March, 

2]  March, 

30  March, 

19  May, 

12  September,  1792, 
His  probable  plans,  I.  63.  His  ••  Ob- 
servations on  the  demand  made  bj 
the  Executive  of  S.  Carolina  of  a  cit- 
izen of  Virginia,"  66.  A  Commiss- 
ioner to  Annapolis,  216,  -17.  ..:'•. 
Governor  of  Virginia,  [1786  1788] 
25  1.  262.  IV.  l;j>0.  A  Delegate  to 
the  Convention  of  17.s7.  I.  275,  328. 
For  a  plural  Executive,  345.  Refuses 
to  subscribe  to  the  Constitution,  and 
why.  354.  His  letter  to  the  General 
Assembly  of  Va.,  370.  His  introduc- 
tory discourse  in  the  ('(invention  at 
Philadelphia,  490,  His  Reporl  on 
the  Judicial*] .  525.  I!is  conversation 
with  W.  < '.  Nicholas,  586.  His  senti- 
ments concerning  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, 586.  His  admission  that  he 
drew  the  Proclamation  of  Neutrality, 
599.  Reprobates  the  commenl  of 
"  Pacificus,"  599.  His  pamphlet  on 
resigning  the  office  of  Secretarj  of 
Stale.  II.  61.  62,  64,*65,  67,  69,  72,74. 
Nol  "  under  the  corrupt  influence  of 
France,"  7 1.  •■  Sell  condemnation  of 
his  political  career,  as  explained  by 
himself,"  74.  Groundless  charge 
that  he  bad  proposed  to  the  Federal 
( '(invention,  and  thai  .Madison  had  ad- 
vocated a  plan  of  a  consolidated 
Govcrunieut,  IV.  280,  28s,  303.     The 


Resolutions   moved    bj   E.   C.  in  the 

<  "M\  ention  were  the  resnll  of  a  i- 

ing  of  the  whole  deputation  from 
Virginia,  and  concurred  or  acquies- 
ced in  unanimously,  merely  as  a  gen- 
eral introducti >f  the  business,  III. 

521.  IV.  339,  380.  History  and  feat- 
ures of  ih"  Resolutions ;  and  colla- 
tion of  them  with  the  plan  adopted. 
1 V.  281  286.  His  assigned  reasons 
for  refusing  to  sign  the  Constitution, 
irreconcilable  with  the  supposition 
thai  he  could  have  proposed  the  Res- 
olutions in  the  meaning  charged  on 
him.  288  [See  I.  251,252,  259,  364, 
387,  418,  17  1.  488,  197.  11.  3,  9,  17. 
60,  17:;.  III.  520,  521,  546.  IN". 
209.] 

Randolph,  John,  His  "  assertion  as  to 
Florida,  and  the  alledged  expression 
that  France  wauled  money  and  must 
have  it."  HI.  104. 

Randolph,  Peyton,  III.  232,  337. 

Randolph,  Rtland,  His  death,  I.  152. 

Randolph,  Thomas  J.,  His  intended 
publication  of  Jefferson's  autobiogra- 
phy, &c,  &c,  HI.  532,  539,  540,  517. 
Intended  trial  for  a  copy  righi  in 
England  and  in  France,  540.  Propos- 
ed publication  of  Jefferson's  MSS., 
618,  629.  IV.  40.  His  letter,  March 
6,  1832,  to  W.  if.  Davis,  ill.  n.  [See 
IV.  16.  141.] 

Randolph,  Thomas  Mann.  H.  26,  559. 
His  improvement  in  ploughing,  HI. 
79.     [See  HI.  149.] 

Randolph,   Mrs.   T.  M.,  III.  540,  617, 
618.    IV.  40. 
Randolph,  Mb.,  .5  92. 

If  ipp.  Frederick,  HI.  497. 

Ratification.  Expediency  of  such  a 
ratification  of  the  new  Constitution. 
by  the  People  themselves  "of  the  sev- 
eral Stales,  as  will  render  it  clearly 
paramount,  to  their  Legislative  au- 
thorities," I.  285,  290,  317.  [See  I. 
323.] 

Rawle,  William,  III.  119, 120. 

Raynkval,  Francis  M.  G.,  Count  de. 
His  mission  to  England,  III.  452.  His. 
letter  to  Monroe.  14  November,  1795. 
453,  462.  JV.  83.  Extract  from  his 
Report,  28  September,  1782,  IH.  457, 
466.  Remarks  on  the  project  of  the 
Preliminary  articles  proposed  to  the 
Court  of  London,  15  November.  17Mi. 
459,  468.  Article  first  —  Newfound- 
land, 459,  468.  Reply  to  the  memo- 
rial of    the  Court  of  London   of   -1 


G60 


CI  EN  E  R  AI     INDE  X 


[B10-U7 


October.  1782,  400.  469.  Letters,  4.7, 
i:;.  D<  cember,  1782,  460,  461,  LI  9 
•170.     [See  IV.  115.] 

B< ciprocity,  III.  303. 

Reed,  George  A.,  A  Senator  from  N. 
Jersey,  I.  439,  442. 

Reed,  Joseph,  Ilis  death,  I.  152. 

Re  eligibility.  I.  3  15. 

Rees  s  <  yclopedia.  MI.  116. 

Reeves's  "  Law  of  shipping  and  navi- 
gation, II.  290. 

"Reform  Objection  to  temporizing  ap- 
plications, I.  287. 

Reformation,  The,  III.  477. 

Regi  i.i  s.  III.  565. 

Religion,  insufficient  to  prevenl  un- 
just laws.  T.  326.  327,  352.  The  per- 
fect equality  of  rights  seemed  lo 
every  religious  sect  by  the  political 
system  of  U.S.,  one  of  its  peculiar 
features,  LII.  17!).  Mutual  independ- 
ence in  U.  S.  of  civil  and  religious 
polity.  Its  advantages,  242,  j.4'6, 
276,  307.  IV.  342.  [See  III.  204.] 
General  progress  in  favor  of*  relig- 
ious liberty.  Examples,  111.  27."). 
'270.  The  tour  great  religious  sects 
running  through  all  the  Slates,  prob- 
ably hostile  to  d.sunion  IV.  430. 
[See  IV.  4"8,  479.]  Resolution  for 
a  legal  provision  for  the  teachers  of 
the  Christian  religion.  I.  130,  140. 
[See  I.  274.]  Religious  assesmenl  in 
II.  I),  of  Virginia"  I.  111.  112.  144, 
148,  154.  159,  175.    Notes  of  Madi 

sen's  speech  against  it.  in  1784.  11(1. 
Memorial  and  remonstrance  against 
it,  I.  161,  163  —  169.  III.  526,  543, 
605,  606.  Religious  freedom.  Opin- 
ions concerning  it  in  Pennsylvania 
and  Virginia,  I.  13,  14.  Act  of  Vir- 
ginia establishing  it.  208.  213.  III. 
526.  543.  Probably  has  "  in  this 
country  extinguished  forever  the  am- 
bitious hope  of  making  laws  for  the 
human  mind."  I.  2]  I. 

'•  Hfiitural  (</'  the  Deposits,"  IV.  355, 
356,  367,  368. 

Removals  from  office,  I.  188.  [See"ExEO- 
ctive  Department,"  "Senateof  U.S. "] 

Renwick,  Mr.,  III.  485. 

Representation.  [See  •■  Apportionment 
ok  Representation."]  Basis  of.  I. 
iso.  iv.  23.  Plan  of,  I.  181.  Change 
in  the  principle  of  representation  in 
the  federal  system,  expedient.  Ac. 
and  why.  285,  286,  287,  288.  Rela- 
tion of  the  people  to  their  represent- 
atives  in   Congress.   IV.   241.       The 


role  of  apportioning    it.  i-   a   funda- 
mental   in   a   free    '  }oi  eminent,  and 
'  in  l>''  fixed  by  the  « 'oni  tilution, 
385.      Ratio  of  representation  in  the 

Lej  isli ol     Va.,  51        55, 

Considerations  recommending  the  in- 
corporation of  Slave  propi  r'\  into  Ihe 
representath  e  -;•  stem  of  Vi  giniu,  53. 

Representative.      Considerations    on 
the  nature  and  extern  of  the  ob 
lien   ol   a  Representative  to  be  guid- 
ed  In  the  known  will  of  bis  constitu- 
ents, III.  478,  479.    Different  opinions 
in  both  G.  B  and  O.  S..  as  to  the  pre- 
cise obligation  imposed  on  a  Repre- 
sentative by  Ihe  instructions  of   his 
constituents,  IV.  128,  429.     'I  he 
tion  a  moral   one  between  him  and 
them,    42!).        Cases    of     ci 
430.    The  question  as  respecting  the 
U.  S.  Senate,  429. 

Repres<  .  Thi  TV.326,327. 

Reptiles,  Different  binds  of,  innumera- 
ble, ill.  68. 

Republic.  [See  "  Constitution  oi  U. 
S.,"  "  Union."']  A  Republican  form 
of  ( rovernment,  lo  effeel  its  pur] 

must     operate     not     within     a     small 

but  an  extensive  sphere,  I.  350.  Im- 
partiality a  vital  principle  of  its  ad- 
ministration, 428.  A  Representative 
Republic  chooses  the  wisdom  of  which 
hereditary  aristocracy  has  the  chance, 
IV.  4(i7.  A  '  i  •  ■  rated  Republic  at- 
tains the  force  of  monarchy,  whilst  it 
equally  avoids  the  ignorance  of  a  good 
prince  and  the  oppression  ol  a  hail, 
4(17.  Former,  and  now  exploded 
opinion,  that  a  Republican  Govern- 
menl  was,  in  its  nature,  limited  lo  a 
small  sphere  :  and  was  in  its  true 
character  only  when  the  sphere  was 
so  small  that  the  People  could  in  ;i 
body  exercise  the  government  over 
themselves,  326,  327.  Effect  of  the 
introduction  of  the  Representative 
principle  into  modern  Governments, 
particularly  of  G.  B.  and  her  Coloni- 
al offsprings. 326,  .".27.  sphere  of  Rep- 
resentative Government  enlarged  by 
combining,  in  U.  s..  a  Federal  with  a 
Republican  organization,  and  by  con- 
venient partitions  and  distributions 
of  power,  327.  This  combination 
promises  a  consummation  of  all  the 
reasonable  hopes  of  the  patrons  of 
Free  Government,  327. 

"Republican  distribution  «>k  citizens," 
IV.  47.").  I7(i.    The  husbandman  :  the 


REP  —  R  I  V  ] 


G  E  N  i:  It  A  L    r  X  I)  E  X 


661 


sailor  :  tbe  interval  between  the  two 
extremes,  175, 176.  The  Professions,  176. 
party.  In  Philadelphia  in 
favor  of  the  new  Constitution,  I.  356. 
Sihistiis  in  it.  [|.  223,  224,  535.  "Re- 
publicans hi-  Democrats,"  III.  317. 
Denial  thai  they  have  abandoned 
their  cause,  and  g »ver  in  tbe  pol- 
icy of  their  opponents  :  and  admissi- 
on, thai  under  changed  circumstances, 
tbej  have  been  reconciled  to  certain 
measures,  &c,  318.     [See  IV.  482.] 

Republicanism.  "  Dangerous  game 
againsi  "  it,  M.  22.  [See  II.  loo',  km. 
461.     IV.  321.J 

"Revenge,  The,"  [I.  -107. 

Revenue,  Hamilton's  plan  of.  I.  501, 
502.  [See  II.  32,  75.]  Its  excess 
beyond  the  estimated  amount,  III.  48. 
Surplus  Revenue,  IV.  ill. 

Revised  Code  of  Virginia.  [See  "Cod- 
ification*," ■•  Virgini  \."]  Prepared 
by  Jefferson,  Pendleton,  and  Wythe, 
I.  199,  203,  207,  212.  III.  532,  583, 
612.  Distributive  shares  of  the 
Revisers  in  preparing  it,  580.  Ad- 
versaries in  ii,  J.  212,213.  Limita- 
tions to  iis  plan  adopted  al  a  consul- 
tative meeting  of  the  Revisors,  III. 
611,  G12.  Time  employed  in  prepar- 
ing it.  A  model  nl'  statutory  compo- 
sition, 612.  [Seel.  260,  268,  269,  270. 
273,  306.] 

Revolution.  [See  "  American  Revolu- 
tion." ] 

Revolutionary    Army.      III.   494,   495. 

022. 

Rhea,  Juiiw  Letter  to: 
1  June,  L816,  III.  6. 
A   Commissioner   for   receiving   sub- 
scriptions to  the  National  Bank;  and 
also   for   treating  with   the   Choctaw 
Indians.  III.  0.  7. 

Rhode  Island.  Emission  of  paper  mo- 
ney,   I.  2  14.     Infamous    scenes,   280. 

Supposed  cause  of  her  refusal  to 
send  Delegates  to  the  federal  Con- 
vention,  286.  Not  impossible  that  she 
may  hereafter  consent  to  an  incorpor- 
ation with  her  neighbor,  III.  333. 
Proposes  twenty  one  amendments  to 
Constitution  U.  S.,  IV.  129.  [See  I. 
143,  196,  275.  282,  284,  292.  317.  326, 
331,  312.  355.  384,  107,  410,  445.  III. 
030.      IV.  251.  254,  255.] 

Rice,  III.  75.  206. 

Richmond.  Seat  of  Government  of 
Virginia,  fixed  there  by  sale  of  pub- 
lic lands,  &c,  I.  188.    Resolutions  re- 


specting Genet,  597,  606.  Washing- 
ton  and  Jefferson  Artillerj  at,  II.  156, 
[See  I.  583.  II.  13,  15.  ill.  316,  1 10. 
Mil.   17  1.   170.   177.  :.03.      IV.  22:i.] 

Richmond  Wnquirer,  III.  282,  515.  600. 
619.  IV.  xxix.,  0.  9.  1  l.  31.  83,  201). 
.",01,    121. 

Richmond  Whig,  IV.  315. 

Ridgeley's  farming  pamphlet.  III.  209. 

Rigbt,  Richard,  M.  P.,  His  pamph- 
let.   III.  210. 

Right  of  way,  III.  340. 

RlKER,  Ii..    \M>  OTHERS,  LETTER  TO  I 
31  May.  1826,  III.  52  1. 

Riker,  R..  Letter  to  : 
2i;  March.  L827,  111.574. 

Ringgold,  Tench,  Letter  to  : 

12  July,  L831,   IV.  189. 
[See    III.  :>>.):>.  599.] 

Rip  raps,  IV.  384. 

Riparian  rights.    [See  ••  International 

Law.'"  &c,  ••  Mississippi  river."] 

Km  iv.  Gen.  Eleazer  W.,  III.  421. 

Ritchie,  Thomas.  Letters  to: 

15  September,    1821,  III.  228 

2  July,  1822,     "     272 

13  August.  "         "     281 

18  December.  1825.  "  506 
2(  May,  1830.  IV.     83 

[See  III.  51  1.  518,547,  600.      IV.  83, 
Kb]       Address  of  himself  and  others, 
wishing  Congress   to   encourage   do- 
mes ic  manufactures,  IV.  9. 
Rittenhodse,  Miss,  1.  446. 

RlTTENHODSE, ,  II    88. 

Rivera.  Principles  of  natural  right 
and  public  law  applicable  to  the  nav- 
igation of  them,  HI.  34G,  347.  [See 
I.  74.     IV.  90,  147.] 

Rn  ES,  William  C,  Letters  to  : 
28  May.  1827,  III.  581 

20  December,  1828,  "  663 
II)  January,  1829,  IV.  3 
23  January,  "  "  6 
12  March,           1833,     "     289 

2  August,            "  "  303 

21  October.  "  "  309 
15  February,  1834,  "  339 
20  January,  1836,  "  120 

19  April.  "  "  432 

His  speech  in  IT.  R.  on  appropriations 
for  Uonds  and  Canals,  HI.  581.  His 
communication  to  the  Richmond  En- 
quirer, signed  "a  Jackson  man  of  the 
School  of  '98,"  IV.  0.  Minister  to 
France,  40.  41.  42.  His  speech  in  U. 
S.  Senate.  February  11,  1833,  on  the 
bill  to  provide  for  the  collection  of 
duties   on  imports,  289.     His  speech 


(3G2 


G  i:  N  E  R  A  L     I  N  D  E  X 


[RIT  —  EUS 


in  U.  S.  Senate  <>n  the  Removal  of  the 
Deposits.  339,  340.  His  Bpeecb,  28 
Marcli  L836,  in  the  1  .  S.  Senate,  on 
the  Expunging  Resolution,  432.  [See 
IV.  39,  270,  271.  272.] 

RrviNGTON,  .1  \mi:s.  II.  131. 

Roods  and  Canals.  [See  "Canals."] 
Ill  35,  49,  53,  55,  56,  219,  483,  490, 
507,  512,  513,  529,  G19.  [V.  89,  92, 
93,  210,  232,  322.  Reporl  of  a  Com- 
mittee on  R.  &  C.  and  their  appeal  to 
the  old  Articles  of  Confederation,  and 
to  the  authority  of  Washington.  531. 

Roank,  Spencer,  Letters  to  : 
2  September,  L819,  HI.  143 
6  May,  1821,     "     217 

29  June,  "         "     222 

Appointed  a  Judge  of  the  General 
Court  of  V;i„  I.  498.  His  fundament- 
al error  in  making  the  General  Gov- 
ernment and  the  .State  Governments 
parties  to  the  Constitutional  compact, 

IV.  18,  2 9 « .  Author  of  "  Hampden  " 
and  "  Algernon  Sidney."  47.  Corres- 
pondence with  hiui,  2:50.  [See  IV. 
1!).] 

Roank.  Mr.,  I.  107.  109,  134,  262. 
Roank, ,  An   elector   of  P.  and 

V.  P.,  I.  457. 

RoBBfxs,  Ashur,  Letters  to  : 
8  August,  1818,111.  106 
21  March,    1832.  IV.  216 
His   speech    on   the    ''Protection    of 
American  Industry,''  IV.  216. 

ROBBINS,  Jonathan,  His  case.  IV.  57. 

Roberts,  Jonathan.  Letter  to  : 
29  February,  1828,  III.  G24. 

Robertson,  David.  II.  75. 

Robertson,  James,  Letter  to  : 
27  March,  1831,  IV.  166. 

Robertson,  John.  Letter  to  : 

23  May.  1836,  IV.  435. 
His  speech  in  II.  R..  5  &  6  April  1836, 
on  the  Naval  Appropriation  Bill,  IV. 
435. 

Robertson,  Dk.  William.  [See  ITT. 
100,  101.]  Examination  of  his  doc- 
trine that  a  retrogression  from  the 
civilized  to  the  savage  state  is  impos- 
sible, III.  65.  His  histories  of  Scot- 
land and  America,  205.  "  Nothing 
astonished  him  so  much  as  that  the 
Colonies  should  have  conceived  it 
possible  to  resist  such  a  power  as 
that  of  the  mother  country,"  IV.  194. 

Robertson,  Mr.,  III.  20. 

Robespierre,  F.  Maximilian  T.  T.,  III. 
72,  139. 


Robinson's  Admiralty  "Reports.  IT.  258, 
25!i,  283,  2:m;.  297,  300,  302,  307,  310, 
313,  321,  323,  324,  326,  340,  342,  348, 
377,  383,  388,  389,  391. 

Rochambeau,  J.  P.  D.  V.,  Count  de,  I. 
51,  232. 

Rochester  and  Brent,  Letter  to  : 
17  March.  1809,  II.  181. 

Rodoers,  ('ait.  John,  Case  of  the 
••  President,"  and   the  "  Little  Belt," 

II.  512. 

Rodney,  Cesar  a.,  H.  159,  470. 
Rodney,   Admiral    George,    at    New 

York,  I.  36,  37. 

Rogers,  Thomas  •'..  Letter  to  : 
li;  January,  1826,  III.  51  I. 

His   ••  Biographical    Remembrancer," 

III.  514. 

Rogi  bs,  Major, .  I.  464. 

Komaink,  Benjamin,  Letters  to: 

20  January,        1822,   III.  257 

14  April,  "  1829,    IV.     37 

8  November.    1832,     "     226 

His   pamphlet  on  State  Sovereignty, 

IV.  226. 

Rome.  Extent  and  population  of  her 
empire.  I.  397,  398.  Its  fall,  III.  239. 
Iler  military  policy,  304  Alleged 
minuteness  of  the  Roman  farms,  301, 
302,  303,  545.  [See  I.  395.  HI.  82. 
IV.  464,  ».] 

Ronald,  ■ .  I.  217.  223,  387. 

•■  Rosalie  and  Betsey,  The"  Case  of,  II. 
325.  326. 

Rusk.  George  Henry,  Special  Minis- 
ter from  G.  P.  to  U.  S..  II.  410.  Ne- 
gotiations with  him,  411  -  421,424. 
His  mission  abortive,  and  why,  422. 
[See  IT.  493.] 

Ross,  David,  A  Commissioner  from 
Virginia  to  Annapolis,  T.  2 Hi.  217. 

Ross,  James,  II.  !>7.  J7s. 

Ross,  Mr., .  II.  27. 

Rotation,  I.  289. 

Rousseau,  J.  J.,  His  project  of  univer- 
sal peace,  IV.  4  70,  471 .   172. 

Rowan,  John,  of  Kv..  His  speech  in 
1'.  S.  Senate,  February  4.  1830,  in 
support  ct'  the  indivisibility  of  Sove- 
reignty. IV.  394,  421. 

RUGGI,  ,  IV.  141. 

••  Rvleof  L756,"  II.  ITT.  299,  306. 

Rumsey,  James.  Exclusive  privilege 
fur  a  limited  term,  to  him,  of  con- 
structing    and     navigating     certain 

boats,    I.    12S.   1  18.      [See  IV.   l!),s.] 

Rush.  Dr.  Benjamin,  Letter  to  • 

7  March,  17'J0,    I.  509. 


1!  i:  S  —  S  C  0  ] 


GENERAL     1  N  D  i:  X 


GG3 


A  pampblel   by  him,  I.  511. 

562.     II.  182.]  ' 
Rush,  Db.  .1.   II.  564. 
Ri  sh,  Richard,  Letters  to  : 


[See  I. 


3  June, 

1814, 

111. 

403 

'.'7  June, 

1817, 

.. 

44 

24  July, 

L818, 

" 

101 

HI  May. 

1819, 

It 

127 

12  August, 

1820, 

u 

179 

I  December, 

•• 

a 

194 

21  April, 

1821, 

it 

209 

20  Xn\  ember, 

" 

" 

234 

1    May, 

1822, 

it 

2G4 

22  July, 

1823. 

t< 

320 

L3  November, 

u 

« 

344 

27  February, 

1824, 

(< 

369 

20  April, 

" 

" 

457 

17  January. 

L829, 

IV. 

5 

1831, 

u 

142 

Attorney  General  of  U.  s..  111.  t22, 
123,  424.  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
(ill.  1 1 1  r-  Treasury  Report,  182  .  'Hi. 
[See  II.  585.  lib  20.  24,  111.  112. 
118,  119.  339.  344,  352.  354,  403,  404, 
•IDS.  417.] 

Russell,  Jonathan,  Lettf.ks  ro  : 
21  July.  1811,    II.    515 

1.")  November,      "        "     517 
[See  fl.549.] 

Russell.  Gen., ,  T.  221. 

Russia.  Mediation  proffered  by  her, 
1.50.  Her  future  growth  overrated, 
III.  236,  238,  239.  Convention  with 
her,  140.  447.  [See  II.  439,  559,  563. 
III.  3.  34,  97.  112,  235.  268,  392.  395.] 

Ri  ii  edge,  Edward,  I.  598. 

Ri  pledge,  John,  A  delegate  from  S. 
Carolina  to  the  Federal  Convention, 
I.  281.  [See  I.  440,  452.  II.  07,  75. 
.mi.  82.] 

Rotledge,  Jons',  Jr.,  II.  19. 

Rltledge,  Mr., ,  I.  422. 


St.  Clair,  Gen.  Arthur,  I.  248,  452, 

551.     Elected  President  of  Congress. 

270.     His  defeat,  543. 
St.  Domingo,  I.  550.     II.  192.    III.  88. 
St.  Eustatius,  II.  303. 
St.  Fond,  Fadjas  t>k.  I.  80. 
St.  George,  Bay  of ,  III.  408. 
St.  John,  — — .  French  Consul,  I.  121, 

436.  157.  473. 
St.  Joiiv.  Mr.,  I.  379. 
St.  Joseph's,  HI.  403,  561. 
St,  Lawrence,  IV.  447.     Claim  of  U.  S. 

to  the  navigation  of   St.  L.  through 


British  Territory,  III.  346,  347 
[See  III.  lol.  404,  111.  416,  420,  561.] 
ersburg,  III.  34. 

St.  Trisb  M.,  I.  446. 

SackeWs    harbour,    II.   580,  589,   591. 
111.  389,  39.6,  404,  116,420. 
ies,  I.  220,  223. 

Salazar.  Jose  M..  -.  Minister  from 
Colombia  to  U.  S.,  III.  1 17. 

Salomon's  Gazelkw.  I.  96. 

Saratoga,  Burgoyne's  surrender  at.  IV. 
194.  Selected  as  one  of  the  Revolu- 
tionary subjects  provided  for  by 
Congress.  370. 

Sartdme,  Antoine.  II.  J.  G.  G.  in-:. 
French  Minister  of  Marine,  removed 
from  office,  I.  41. 

Saunders, ,  II.  152. 

Savage, , 

I.  312. 

Savannah,  II.  007.     III.  409. 

••  Siicnitinili  Geitrifiity,"1  IV.  139. 

Sat,  John  I)..  Letter  to  : 

1  May,  L820,  III.  2. 
His  Treatise  on   Political   Economy, 
and   possible   immigration   to  U.  S., 
III.  2. 

Schaepper,  Rev.  F.  G,  Letters  to  : 
8  January,     1820,   III.  102 
3  December,  1821,     '•     242 

SCHLEGEL,  J.  F.  W.,  II.  376, 
585. 

Schoarie,  laid  in  ashes  bv  the  British. 
1.37. 

Schoolcraft,  Henry  R..  Letter  to  : 
22  January.   1822,  III.  257. 

Schuyler,  Gfn.  Philip,  Efforts  of  the 
New  York  subscribers  to  the  Bank  of 
U.  S.  to  put  him  at  the  head  of  the 
Directors.  I.  538. 

••  Scipio,"  [  ?  by  Charles  Lee,  Attorney 
General]  II.  124,  120. 

Scott,  Robert  G..  Letter  to  : 
G  October,  1824.  III.  471. 

Scott,  Tiio.m  is,  II.  21. 

Sinn.  Sir  William.  (Lord  Stowell,) 
Political  change  made  by  him  in  the 
judicial  rules  of  condemnation,  II. 
330.  Its  commercial  explanation, 
330  —  338.  Judicial  despotism,  338! 
Extract  from  his  judgment  in  case  of 
the  Emmanuel,  349,  350,  360.  Its 
"florid  and  fervid  style."  301.  An- 
swer to  his  reasoning.  350  —  300. 
Influence  of  English  ideas  on  his 
judgments.  389.  His  remarkable  ac- 
knowledgment. III.  300.  •■  As  the 
organ  or  as  the  oracle  of  the  British 
Government,'"  300.     [See  II.  243,  283, 


664 


G  E  N  E  U  A  L     I  N  I)  E  X 


[SCO—  SEC 


300,  310,  313,  322,  323,  324,  325,  326, 

330,  331,  332,  343,  345,  380,  381,  383, 

387,  391.] 
Scott,  I  }en.  VVinfiei.d,  Iir.  415. 

Scoi  r.  Mrs., .  III.  193. 

Sears,  VV.    I.,  III.  L5. 

Seasons,    Unfruitful,     Their   effect  on 

the  prices  of  subsistei and  Labor, 

III.  576. 

Secession.  [See  "Compact,"  "Consti- 
tution op  11.  S.,"  ••  Massachusetts," 
'•  \'i  unification,"  ••  Sni  in  Caroli- 
na," "  Sovereignty."]  Article  in  the 
••  Southern  Reuieto"  seeming  to  identi- 
fy tlic  Legislative  power  of  the  States 
with,  or  rather  to  substitute  it  for.  the 
Sovereignty  of  the  People,  "between 
which  there  is  all  the  difference  which 
exists  between  a  creature  and  the 
creator."  III.  663.  Effecl  of  sorru  of 
the  late  Southern  doctrines  to  make 
the  political  system  of  U.  S.  not  a 
Government,  bul  a  mere  League.  In 
the  ease  of  a  "mere  League  theremusl 
be  as  much  right  on  one  side  to  assent 
and  maintain  its  obligation  as  on  the 
other  to  cancel  it."  (i(i:i.  Examples  in 
the  condition  of  New  York,  Massa- 
chusetts, or  Pennsylvania,  if  portions 
containing  their  great  commercial 
cities,  invoking  original  rights  as  par- 
amount to  social  and  constitutional 
compacts,  should  erect  themselves 
into  distinct  ami  absolute  Sovereign- 
ties. The  evils  of  such  a  mutilation 
of  a  Slate  to  some  of  its  parts, 
might  be  felt  by  some  of  the  States 
from  a  separation  of  its  neighbors  in- 
to absolute  and  alien  sovereignties, 

IV.  6V  ••  The  disorganizing  doctrine 
which  asserts  a  right,  in  every  Slate  In 
withdraw  itself  from  the  Union."  46. 
46.  Secession  and  Nullification  '"both 
spring  from  the  same  poisonous  root," 
196.  Geographical  reasons  against 
Secession.  225.  A  result  of  the  doc- 
trine is  that  a  single  State  may  be 
turned  out  of  the  Union  hv  the  oilier 
s;:,tes.  228,  336.  Ought  to  l>e  buried 
in  the  same  grave  with  its  "  twin  her- 
esy "  Nullification,  268.  A  question 
between  the  states  themselves  as 
panics  m  the  Constitutional  compact. 

The  great  argument  for  it  derived 
from  the  Sovereignty  of  the  parties  : 

as  if  the  mure  complete  the  authority 

to  enter  iu.o  a   compact,  the   less  was 

the  obligation  to  abide  by  it.  269. 
Different  forms  in  which  the  doctrine 


is   p uti'd.  269,  270.     Ii  -  essential 

uiffereQce  from  Expatriation,  270.  336. 
A  seceding  State  mutilates  the  do- 
main, and  disturbs  the  whole  system 
from    which   it    separates    itself,  270. 

Fallacy  of  arguments  drawn  from  the 

difficulty  under  Constitution  U.  S.  of 
avoiding  collisions,  ami  from  want  of 

remedies    for   |ni--ii>l scurrences, 

270.  The  question,  whether  a  State. 
by  resuming  the  Sovereign  form  in 
which  it  entered  the  Union,  may  not. 
id'  right  withdraw  from  it.  at  will,  IS  a 
simple  question  whether  a  State,  more 
than  an  individual,  has  a  right  to  vio- 
late its  engagements,  290.  The  natu- 
ral   and    Laudable    attachment   of    the 

People    composing    a    State    to    its 

authority  and  importance,  now  united 
by  the  unnatural  feelings  with  which 
they  have  been  inspired  against  their 
brethren  of  other  Slates.  291.  han- 
ger id'  their  being  misled  into  erro- 
neous views  of  the  nature  of  the 
Union  and  the  interest  they  have  in 
it.  29L  It  is  clear  that  while  a  State 
remains  in  the  Union,  it  cannot  with- 
draw its  citizens  from  the  operation 
of  the  Constitution  and  law-  of  the 
Union.  291,  In  the  event  of  an  actu- 
al   secession    Without    the    eon-ent     of 

the  co-States,  the  course  to  lie  pursu- 
ed by  these  involves  questions  pain- 
ful  in   the  discussion   of  them,  291. 

■■  Dodges  the  blow,  by  Confounding 
the  claim  to  secede  at  will  with  the 
right  of  seceding  from  intolerable  op- 
pression." 293.  The  former  is  a  vio- 
lation, without  cause,  of  a  faith  sol- 
emnly  pledged  :  the  latter,  is  another 
name   lor    Revolution,   about   which 

there   is  llo   theoretic  controversy.  29& 

Advantage  gained  by  this  double  as- 
pect of  the  subject,  and  by  mixing  it- 
self with  the  question  whether  the 
Constitution  of  U.  S.  was  formed  by 
the  People  ,,r  by  the  States,  293. 
This  question  decided  by  the  undis- 
puted fact  that  the  Constitution  was 
made  by  the  People,  bul  as  imbodied 

into  the  several  Stales  who  were  par- 
ties to  it,  and  therefore  m  ile  by  the 
States  in  their  highest  authoritative 
capacity.  293.  [See  IV.  7.",.  <j:,.  240, 
241.]  Persons,  renouncing  the  views 
and  language  which  have  been  appli- 
ed by  the  Republican  party  to  tin 
Constitution  of  U.  S..  are  now  charg- 
ing, in   the  name  of  Republicanism, 


s  k  D  -  a  u  a  ] 


G  E  n  i:  i;  a  i.    1  n  ii  i:  x 


065 


those  who  remain  Bteadfasl   to  their 

er I.  with  innovation,  inconsistency, 

heresy  and  apostasy,  IV.  321,  323,  An 
outrage  on  truth,  on  justice,  and  fen 
on  common  decorum,  321.  The  doct- 
rine thai  a  State  may  at  will  Becede, 
iint  countenanced  by  the  Virginia 
Proceedings  of  L798  '99,  334,  335. 
[See  IV.  65,  66,  196,  568.] 

Si  dgwick.  Theodore,  II.  7.  19,  21,  29, 
63,  66. 

Sedgwick,  Theodore.  Jr.,  Letter  to  : 
12  February,  L831J  IV.  161. 

■■  Sedition  Law."  '•  An  Acl  in  addition 
to  •  an  Act  for  the  punishmenl  ol  cer 
tain  crimes  against  the  U.  S.."  (H 
July  1798,  I.  Stat.  I..  596.)  II.  160. 

■■■'<  of  \  essels  for  French 
goods,  I.  585. 

Seldkn,  Mh.es,  T.  134. 
I    ..  Mi;..  I.  HIT. 

•  /  Trials,"  in  Library  of  X.  Y. 
Historical  Society,  IV.  378. 

Si  /  G  Yoernment,  'ill.  245,  258,  31S. 
fV.  58. 

irk,  Lord,  Appointed  to  Bucceed 
Merry  as  .Minister  from  G-.  B.  to  U.  >.. 
II.  222. 

Senate.  [See  ••Mint."  "  Ofpice," 
••  Titles."]  Ought  to  be  included  in 
the  Legislative  Department, 1. 177.  A 
good  model  in  the  Constitution  of 
Maryland  :  a  bad  one  in  that  of  Vir- 
ginia. 177.  Term  of  service.  185. 
Appointmenl  bv  Districts  objectiona- 
ble, Ac.  186.  Senate  of  U.  S.  •'  the 
great  anchor  of  the  Government," 
olli.  The  Executive  function  of  the 
Senate  of  I'.  S.  is  exceptionable,  476. 
Why  it  should  not  share  in  the  power 
of  removal  from  office,  476,  -177.  478. 
484,  187.  Ii>  Constitution  in  1798. 
II.  129.  Popular  jealousy  of  it,  168. 
President  Madison  declines  to  confer 
with  a  committee  of  the  S.  on  the 
subject  of  a  nomination,  565.  I  ro 
ceedings  on  the  nomination  of  Galla- 
tin as  Minister  to  Russia,  566 — 569.  Its 
in terposition, varying  the  date  at  which 

an  army  officer  shall  take  rank  from 
that  specified  in  his  nomination.  II 1. 
269,  282,  283.  Claim-  made  by  the 
Senate  in  opposition  to  the  princi 
pie  and  practice  of  every  administra- 
tion, and  varying  materially,  in  -nine 
instances,  the  relations  between  the 
great  departments  of  the  Govern- 
ment, IV.  356.  Its  claim  of  a  share 
in  the  power  of  removals  from  office, 


if  established,  would  materially  vary 
the   relations   among  the  component 

parts  of  the  ( b>\ eminent .  and  disturb 
the  operation  of  the  checks  ami  bal- 
as  now  understood  to  exist. 
342,  343,  368,  385.  Light  in  which 
the  larger  Sun-  would  probably  re- 
gard any  innovation  increasing  the 
weighl  of  the  Senate.  342,  343, 
368,  385.  A  claim  for  the  Leg- 
islature of  a  discretionarj  regula- 
tion of  the  tenure  of  office,  368, 
This  would  van  Ibe  relation  of  the 
Departments  to  each  other,  ami  leave 
a  wide  held  for  Legislative  abuses, 
368.  A  Query.  Distracting  and  dil- 
atory Operation  of  a  Veto  in  the  Sen- 
ate, on    the    removal    from    office,  36i . 

385.  Another  novelty,  Ac.  :  The  al- 
leged limitation  of  the  qualified  Veto 
of  the  President  to  Constitutional  ob- 
jections. 369.  Another  :  The  power 
id'  the  Executive  to  make  diplomatic 
and  consular  appointments  dining 
the  recess  of  the  Senate.  369.  New 
assumption  that  the  appointments  can 
be  made  for  places  only  which  had 
been  previously  filled,  erroneous  in 
principle  and  injurious  in  practice. 
■ill!).     Difficulty  involved   in   it.  in  the 

Case     of    Treaties,     even    Treaties      (,f 

peace,    370.      Attempt    ',■>   derive    a 

power  to  the  President   to  provide  for 

the  ease  of  terminating  a  war  from 
his  military  power  to  establish  a 
truce.  Ac.,  370.  Claim  of  a  right  to 
be  consulted  by  the  President,  and  to 
give  their  advice  previous  to  his  for- 
eign negotiations.  370.  Result  of  a 
direct  or  analogous  experiment  unfa 
vorable,  370.  Proofs,  371 .  'I  wo  fold 
character  of  Y.  S.  Senate  as  a  Legis- 
lative and  a  Judicial  body,  375 
Right  of  instruction  as  affecting  the 
tenure  of  the  Senate,  which  was 
meant  as  an  obstacle  to  instability 
which  history  and  experience  has 
shown  to  be  the  besetting  infirmity 
of   popular  Governments,    129,  430. 

[See  II.  18.      III.  268.] 

Serfs,  IV.  53. 

Sergeant,    John,     A     Commissionci 
to  the  Congress  at  Panama,  III.  540. 

Sew  'u.i..  S  wu  et-,  II.  130. 

Shakers,  III.  2 10. 

Shai.eu,  Wii.ua.m.  Consul   General    to 

Algiers.  III.  M.  :',:,. 
SHALER,  Mi:.. .  II.  500. 

SliAKl'LESS,  ,  II.  8'J. 


6G6 


G  i:  N  B  R  AL    INDEX 


[  8  H  A  —  S  L 


Shays,  Daniel.  [See  "  Massachu- 
setts."] Iiis  Rebellion,  I.  2;.:;.  277, 
278.  HI.  244.  Escape  of  the  princi- 
pal incendiaries,  278, 

Sheep,  IV.  464,  n. 

Sheefield,  Lord,  IV.  456. 

Shelburne,  [Marquis  of  Lansdowx] 
III.  462,  165,  -JOG,  407. 

SlIELBT,      Isaac,     GOVERNOR     OF    Ky., 

Letter  to  : 

8  August  1813,  II.  570. 
[See  III.  389,  422.] 

Sheldon,  Daniel,  Secretary  of  Lega- 
tion to  France,  III.  19. 

Sherman,  Converse,  Letter  to  : 
10  .March.  1826,  111.  518. 

Sherman,  Roger,  His  opinions  respect- 
ing amendments  to  the  Constitution. 
1.404.     [So,.  J  V.  217.] 

Ship  Island,  II.  180. 

Shirley,  William,  Governor  of  Massa- 
chusetts, III.  105. 

Short,  William.  Letter  of  credence  to 
him  as  Minister  to  Russia,  in  Februa- 
ry 1809,  11.445.  140.  [See  I.  SO.  ss, 
8!),  90,  101,  lol.  ]()7.  334,  171).  II. 
10.",.  20!).  448,  449,  451).] 

Short,  Mr.,  I.  134. 

Siberia,  Subterranean  city  discovered 
in.  I.  7'.).  so.  151. 

Sicily,  III.  M,  S2. 

Sidney,  Algernon,  III.  481. 

"  Sidney,"  a  writer  in  l'Teneau's  Ga- 
zelle.']. 501. 

"  Sidney,''  His  analysis  of  the  des- 
patches from  the  U.  S.  Ministers  to 
France,  11.  139. 

Sttesian  loan,  11.  260. 

Simmons.  William.  111.  423. 

Simms.  Robert,  His  memorial,  asking 
an  impeachment  of  the  Senate.  II.  os. 

Simolin,  ,   Russian   Minister  at 

London.  II.  271. 

Slnci.aik,  Sir  John,  III.  128.     IV.  45G. 

SlNCLAHl.  (APT..   III.  396,  400.  41  1. 

Sitgreaves,  Samdel,  II.  03.  00,  107. 

Skinner,  Timothy.  Letter  to  : 
22  March.  1809,  II.  436. 

Skinner, .  III.  500. 

Skipwith,  — .  I.  248,  405.    II.  02,  118. 

Skureman,  Mi;..  1.  452. 

Slavery.  [See  "African  Slave 
Tradb,"  •'  Congress,"  "Constitction 
op  U.  S.."  "  Emancipation."  •' Free 
Negroes,"  "  Great  Britain,"  "Man- 
omission,"   "Missouri,"   "Virginia," 

Ac]  Wish  to  depend  as  little  as  pos- 
sible on  the  labor  of  slaves.  !.  101. 
Petition  to  the  Legislature  of  Virgin- 


ia for  the  gradual  abolition  of  Sla- 
very, 217,  The  existence  ol  Slavery, 
and  the  Republican  theory.  322,  Pe- 
tition to  ( longress  respecting  Slavery, 
542.  Causes  influencing  the  general 
condition  of  slave.-.  III.  120.  Princi- 
ples for  its  eventual  extinguishment, 
in  I'.  S..  133.  Objections  to  a 
thorough  incorporation  of  tin-  white 
and  black  nm-.  ]:,[.  The  Coloniz- 
ing plan.  131,  249.  Voluntary  con- 
tributions. 135.  The  objeel  national, 
and  claims  the  interposition  of  the 
nation.  135.  Public  lands  a  suitable 
resource,  136,137,170.  Agg  1 1  g  ite  sum 
and  quantity  of  land  needed,  136. 
Reliance  on  the  justice  of  the  non- 
slaveholding  Slates.  137.  Their  lib- 
eral contribution-  to  the  A.  C.  Socie- 
ty, 137.  Amendment  of  the  <  insti- 
tution may  be  necessary,  138.  Sla- 
very ••  the  greal  evil  under  which 
the  nation  labors."  138.  A  portent- 
ous evil.  170.  Ii-  evil  ••  moral,  polit- 
ical and  economical."  193,  19  1.  ■•  A 
sad  blot  on  our  free  country."  239. 
Exclusion  of  the  term  "  -law-." 
from  (he  Constilntion  of  l".  S..  150. 
The  Ordinance  of  17s7  for  the  N.  W. 
Territory,  without  authority,  151. 
Grounds  on  which  three  fifths  of  the 
Slaves  were  admitted  into  the  ratio 
of  representation,  15  1.  169.  <  )onsid- 
erations  as  to  the  expediency  of  exer- 
cising a  supposed  power  in  Congress 
to  prevent  a  diffusion  of  the  slaves 
actually  in  the  country.  155,  156. 
Imputed  object  of  (he  zealous  opposi- 
tion to  the  extension  of   slavery  to 

form  a  new  stale  of  parties,  founded 
on  local  instead  of  political  distinc- 
tions, loi.  l<)9.  The  right  of  Cong- 
ress to  prohibit  Slavery  in  a  Territo- 
ry during  its  Territorial  periods  "de- 
pends on  the  clause  in  the  Constitu- 
tion specially  pro\  iding  lor  the  man- 
agement   of  these    subordinate  e-tab- 

lishmenis."  168.  Leaning  to  the  be- 
lief (hat  the  restriction  is  not  within 
the  true  scope  oi'  the  Constitution, 
168.  Uncontrolled  dispersion  of 
slaves  DOW  in  U.  S.  best  tor  the  na- 
tion, and  most  favorable  for  the 
slaves  also,  both  as  to  (heir  prospects 

of  emancipation,  and  as  to  their  con- 
dition in  the  meantime.  169,  190. 
"Perplexities"  which  develope  more 

and  more  the  dreadful  "  fruitfulness 
of  the  original   sin    of    the    African 


.-•   M   I  ] 


G  i:  n  1:  i:  A  L    1  N  i>  i:  x 


GG7 


trade,"  190.  rncrease  of  population 
of  slaves,  213,  214.  Employment  of 
overseers  ;  mortgages  and  sales  of 
slaves  ;  their  mode  of  labor,  ttv.it- 
lin'iit.  religious  instruction,  man  i 
and  increase  in  Virginia,  313,  314, 
315,  A  pel plexing  species  of  labor. 
30 1.  Notice  of  a  plan  lor  its  total 
abolition  in  I  .  S.,  IV.  215.  [See  IV. 
301.]  Magnitude  of  the  evil,  III. 
495,  496.  Difficulties  in  the  way  of 
abolishing  Slavery,  496.  Spanish  ex- 
periment of  allotting  portions  of  time 
to  slave-  with  a  view  to  their  work- 
ing out  their  freedom,  197.  Exam- 
ples of  the  Moravians,  the  Harmon- 
ites,  and  Ihe  Shakers,  497,  198. 
Slavery  impairs  the  influence 
ut  ilio  political  example  of  the 
U.  S.,  Hi.  542.  Slave  labor  in  manu- 
factories, (i-7.  Sla\  es  ami  the  ques 
tion  of  Representation,  IV.  2,  .">,  52, 
55,  57,  59.  Slavery  a  blot  on  our  lie- 
publican  character,  HO.  The  dread- 
ful calamity  which  has  so  long  afflict- 
ed our  country,  213.  Declara  ion 
••  that  all  men  are  born  equally  free,'"' 
188.  Disunion  would  substitute  the 
protection  of  fugitive  slaves  lot-  the 
obligatorj  surrender  el'  them,  192. 
Dew's  pamphlet,  -74.  Emancipation 
inadmissible     without     deportation, 

275.  If  emancipation  were  the  sole 
object,  slavery  could  be  extinguished 
within  a  limited  period,  by  the  pur- 
chase bj  the  public  of  all  female 
children  at  their  birth,  leaving  them 
in  bondage  till  it  would  defray  the 
charge  of  rearing  them,  275.  The 
greal  difficulty  lies  in  the  attainment 
of  the  requisite  asylums  ;  the  consent 
of  the   individuals  to   be   removed; 

ami     the    labor    for  the  vadium    to    lie 

created,  275.  increasing  voluntary 
emancipations;  gifts  ami  legacies; 
Legislative  grants  by  the  States ;  pos- 
sibility of  aid  from  the  Public  Lands. 
^7.">.  'i7<;.  Facts  showing  the  facility 
of  providing  naval  transportation  for 
the  exiles.  276;  Africa  the  primary 
asylum,  276.  Auxiliary  asylums  in 
W.  I.,  and  in  territory  under  control 
of  U.  S.,  276.    Repugnance  of   the 

blacks  to  removal  :  its  causes  and 
the  prospect  of  its  being  overcome, 

276,  ^77.  Answer  to  the  objection 
of  the  difficulty  of  replacing  the 
labor  withdrawn  by  removal  of  the 
slaves,  i'77.     Influence  of  Slavery  in 


producing  the  depressed  condition  of 
Virginia,  277,  278.  [See  III.  601, 616.] 

SMJ  in.  BERNARD,  LEI  I  I  l:  TO  : 

September.  1820,  III.  181. 

Smith.  Ki.isii  \.  LETTER  TO: 
1 1  September,  1831,  LV.  194. 

Smith,  .)..  I.  60. 

Smi  in.  .Mi:.-.  MaRG  IRET,  LetTEB  TO  : 
September,  1830,  IV.  1 1 1. 

Smith.  Meriwether.  I.  I. 'II.  387.  A 
tradition  connecting  him  with  a 
sketch  of  the  ( lonstitution  of  Virginia 
adopted  in  177ii.  III.  (.07. 

Smith,  Robert,  Secretary  or'  State, 
"Memorandum  as  to,"  II.  192,  506. 
Declines  the  mission  to  Russia,  492. 
His  expected  hostility.  492.  Author- 
izes an  explanation  of  Ins  •■  rupture 
with  the  President,  195.  His  sympa- 
thizers, 559.  [See  II.  137,  450,  452, 
453,  459,  485,  507,  512,  513,  571, 
7>7J.] 

.-mini.  Gen.  Samuel,  I!.  7:;.  76,  506. 
His  interview,  reported  by  Jefferson, 
with  .1.   A.   Bayard,   respecting    the 

Presidential      election    of     1801,     IV. 
157.     His  deposition  in  the  case  of 
Gillespie    v.    Smith,    153,    154,    155, 
156. 
Smith,  Samuel  Harrison,  Letters  to. 

1  November,  1826,  111.  53] 

2  February,      1827,  "     549 

His  .Memoir  of  Jefferson,  III.  531. 
549.  ••The  lights  of  Ins  mind  and 
the  purity  of  his  principles,"  IV.  llo. 
[See  11.  588,  602.] 

Smith,  Wii.uam.  II.  If).  1!),  107.  IN. 
213.  Born  in  South  Carolina,  but 
absent  n t  the  date  of  Independence. 
His  election  as  a  representative  to 
the  first  Congress  contested  on  the 
ground  that  the  Revolution  dissolved 
the  social  compact  within  the  Colon- 
ies, and  produced  a  stale  of  nature 
which  required  a  naturalization  of 
tho>e  who  had  not  participated  in 
the  Revolution,  IV.  392.  Decision, 
that  his  birth  in  the  Colony  made  him 
a  member  of  the  society  in  its  new  as 
well  as  iis  original  slate,  :'>92. 

Smith.  \Y.,  Chief  Justice  of  Canada,  I. 
535. 

Smith.  Col.  W.,  II.  220. 

Smith,  Coi...  His  conversations  with 
the  British  .Ministry.  I.  :>;!7. 

Smith,    Mi;.. ,    President    of    the 

Academy  in  Prince  Edward  Co.  Va., 
I.  233. 

Smith,  Mi:.,  I.  107,  200,  210,  217,  218, 


GU8 


G  E  N  E  Ii  A  L     INDEX 


[  6  II  V  -    So  D 


222.    II.  21  i.  215.     Agaiusl  bt 
the  Federal  system.  1.  223. 

Smith  and  Ogden.  Case  of,  II.  225. 

Smuggling,  111.  646. 

Smyth,  Gen.  Alex  inder,  Mistake  as  to 
his  talent  for  military  command,  III. 
562. 

Snyder,  Simon,  Governor    of  Penn 
sylvani  \.  Letters  to  : 
13  April,  1809,  II.  439 
5  July,    1810,    ••    180 

Society  ob   Aim-.   Philadelphia., 
Letter  to  : 
28  January,  L810,  II.  190. 

"Sophistry  of  the  Passions ,"  111.  663. 

South,  American  claims,  II.  208. 

Soi  mi  Carolina,  The  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives of  the  State  oi  . 
Letj  Kit  ro  : 

8  January,   1812,  II.  523 
The  Senate  and  House  of  Represen- 
tatives of  the  State  of,  Letter  to  : 

Ki  October,  1812,  II.  548. 
The  Legislature  of  the  State  of, 
Letter  to  : 

December,  1813,  II.  579. 
Her  demand  of  the  surrender  of  a 
citizen  of  Virginia,  charged  with 
beating  Jonas  Beard,  I.  7G.  lias  re- 
ceived from  Africa  since  the  peace 
about  12,000  Blaves,  J  lis.  Next  in 
order  to  Pennsylvania  and  North 
Carolina,  in  the  rage  for  paper  mo- 
ney, 244.  Suggested  reason  for  her 
not  sending  Commissioners  to  An- 
napolis, 246.  In  the  Federal  Conven- 
tion, inflexible  on  the  point  of  the 
slaves,  1.  353.  Elections  in,  II.  26. 
Her  opposition  in  the  Convention  of 
17^7.  to  a  power  in  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment In  prohibit  the  African  .Slave 
Trade,  III.  L50.  Report  on  codifying 
the  laws  of  S.  C,  611.  Provision  for 
Jefferson's  daughter,  (il7.  IV.  10. 
Spirit  of  disunion  in  S.  C,  111.  635. 
Contrast  with  her  former  political  de- 
portment, 635.  Surprise  thai  she 
should  be  the  birth  place  of  the  doc- 
trine thai  w ould  convert  the  Federal 
Government  into  a  mere  League, 
which  would  quickly  throw  the  States 
back  into  a  chaos,  IV.  •">.  6.  In  the 
Convention  of  1787  members  from  S. 
C.  proposed  that  the  power  of  en- 
couraging    domestic     manufactures 

should  be  used  to  the  extent  not  onl\ 
of  imposts,  but  of   prohibitions,  r>. 

16.      Has  always  favored  tonnage  and 

other  duties  for  encouraging  naviga- 


tion,   and   why,    13.     For   Ihe   same 
reason  should  concur  in  encoui 
manul  13,  1 1.     Different 

tween  the  doctrine  of  Virginia  in '98 
'99.  and  the  present  doc;  i  ine  in  S. 
' '..  1 1.  Surprise  and  sorrow  at 
proceedings  in  S.  C,  which  are 
understood  to  assert  a  right  to  a 
the  Acta  of  i  longress  within  the  .- 
and  even  to  sec*  de  from  the  Union  it- 
self. 66.  Report  of  a  committee  of 
the  S.  <  'arolina  II.  of  l>'..  Decembi  r  9, 
1828,  stating  the  Nullifying  doctrine, 
M7.  421.  Proposes  live  amendments 
to  Constitution  U.  S.,  129.  Violent 
spirit  in  S.  C.  Doctrines  of  the 
menacing  tendency.  Not  supported 
in  them  even  by  the  States  most  sym- 
pathizing in  her  complaints,  i  10. 
Right  in  a  single  State  to  annul  an 
Act  of  Congress,  maintained  with  a 
Warmth  proportioned  to  its  want  of 
strength,  Hi.  "  Strange  doctrines 
and  misconceptions  "  there,  much  to 
be  deplored,  Ac.  :  Patronized  by 
statesmen  of  shining  talents  and  pa- 
triotic reputations.  191,  267.  '1  he 
■•  anomalous  doctrines,"  &c.,  193. 
The  hotbed  where  Nullification 
sprung  up,  l!)(i.  Her  perseverance  in 
claiming  the  authority  of  the  Virginia 
proceedings  in  1798  -  '99,  as  asserting 
a  right  ir  a  single  State  to  nullify  an 
act  of  I.  S..  204.  Unfairness  of  at- 
tempting to  palm  on  Virginia  an  in- 
tention contradicted  by  proof,  never 

i tenanced,    and     now.    with     one 

voice,  disclaimed  by  her.  204.  Im- 
propriety of  the  efforl  :  Virginia,  if 
she  could  disown  a  doctrine  which 
was  her  own  oflspring,  Would  be  a 
bad  authority  to  lean  on,  in  any  case, 
204.  Imprudence  "  of  an  appeal  from 
the  present  to  a  former  period,  as  if 
from  a  degenerate  to  a  purer  state  of 
political  orthodox)  :  since  S.  C. 
to  be  consistent  would  be  obliged 
to  surrender  her  present  Nullifying 
notions  to  her  own  higher  authority, 

when  she  declined  to  concur  and  co- 
operate wiih  Virginia  at  the  period 
of  the  Alien  and  Sedition  laws."  204. 
Headlong  course. ''Alternative  pre- 
sented by  the  dominant  party  there, 
i-  so  monstrous,  that  ii  would  seem 
impossible  that  it  should  be  sustained 
by   any   of    the    most    sympathizing 

Slates,  unless  th  re  be  latent  views 
apart  from  Constitutional  question.-," 


8  01  SOT] 


G  E  N  I!  R  A!,     IND  E  X 


lilV.I 


Her  Nullifying  Ordinance  of 
-.  and  the  Report  Introducing  it, 
22 1.  -'.7.  232.  \i  the  time  of  Lhe 
Virginia  Resolutions  of  1798,  improb- 
able thai  the  idea  of  a  nullification  bj 
a  si  had  ever  entered  the 

thoughts    'if     a     citizen    of 

\i  the  firsl  Bession  of  the  First 
jress,  one  of  her  members  pro- 
posed a  .liny  on  hemp,  us  a  proper 
encouragemenl  for  the  culture  of  the 
article  in  the  suitable  soil  and  climate 
of  thai  Siaic.  2 17.  Reaction  taking 
place  I,,  s.  < '..  i'ii7.  Universal  pro- 
test "in  of  the  Sine  against  Nuliifica- 
f -'ii.  267,  268.  S.  c.  in  favor  of  the 
Alien  and  Sedition  law-.  1 1."..  If  S. 
C.  recedes  from  her  position,  it  will 
be  on  the  avowed  grounds  <>l  her  re- 
spect for  the  iuterposition  of  Virgin- 
ia, ami  :i  reliance  that  Virginia  i- 
f>  make  common  cause  with  her 
throughout,  273.  Prospect  in  thai 
•  ■\  ent,  ami  a  continuance  of  the  Tar- 
iff laws,  273.  Her  novel  ami  Nullify- 
ing doctrine  that  the  States  never 
parted  with  an  atom  <>r  their  S  iver- 
eignty,  289.  A  historical  paiuting 
representing  Ac,  299.  [See  IV. 
559.]  Torch  of  discord  be 
queathed  by  the  Convention  of 
S.  ('.  to  its  country,  IV.  568. 
[See  l.  |:;7.  27.1.  277.  279,  281,  292, 
:;.".7.  370,  375,  378,  382,  139,  •">"!).  ill. 
516.  il.  in.  lilt.  165,  154,  523,  548, 
17!).  J 1 1.  152,  213,  619.  [V.  13,  255. 
358.] 

;.  of,  III.  291. 

Southard,  Samuel  L..  Lettehto: 
•I  .May.  L828,  III.  631. 
Secretary  of  the  Navy.     Question  be- 
tween Gen.  Jackson  and  himself,  III. 
599.     His  address  before  the  <  Colum- 
bia Institute,  631. 

'  Southern  ascendency."  Unfounded 
allegations  of  its  existence  in  the  Na- 
tional <  Councils,  III.  185. 

South  [See  '■  Conven- 

tion. "] 

■•  Southern   Review,"  III.  663.     !\'.  1  16. 

SOI  THW1CK,  SOLOMON,  LtETTEB  TO  : 

2]  April,  1821,  III.  216. 

SOVEREIGNTY.     [See  "  COMPACT,"  "  N*i  I.- 

uficatio.v,"  "Secession,"  "States 
op  the  Union."]  Sacrifices  of  Sover- 
eignty on  which  the  [old]  Federal 
Government  rests,  I.  205.  The  indi- 
vidual independence  of  the  States  ir- 
reconcilable   with    their    aggregate 


7,  The  great  desidi  r- 
atum  in  <  ln\  ernmenl  is  bucd  a  modi- 
on  of  the  Sovereignty  as  will 
render  it  sufficie  il  between 
different  interests  and  factions  to  con- 
trol one  part  of  the  society  from  in- 
vading the  rights  of  another,  and,  ar, 
the  same  time  sufflcientlj  controlled 
it  self  from  setting  up  an  interest  ad- 
verse to  that  of  the  whole  Society, 
327,  353.  A  limited  Government 
may  be  limited  in  its  Sovereignty,  HI. 
I  16.  The  local  Sovereignties  of  the 
several  States,  1  16.  The  Constitution 
of  U.  S.  divides  the  Sovereignty  be- 
tween  the   Federal  Govern nt  ami 

the  respective  State-,  iv.  61,  t20. 
[See  IV.  299,  320,  321  [  Thebneness, 
the  Sovereignty,  and  the  Nationality 
of  the  People  of  the  United  States 
within  thepri  scribed  limits,  has  hitherto 
been  the  language  of  all  parties,  320. 
The  Supreme  power,  that  is,  the  Sov- 
ereignty of  the  People  of  the  States, 
in  its  nature  divisible,  1 V.  390.  In 
fact  divided,  according  to  the  Consti- 
tution of  U.  S..  between  the  States  in 
their  united  and  the  States  in  their  in- 
dividual c  ipacities,  390.  So  viewed 
by  the  <  Convention  in  transmitting  the 
itntion  to  the  Congress  of  the 
(deration,  390,  391,  121.  So 
viewed  ami  called  in  official,  in  con- 
troversial,  ami  in  popular  language, 
39 1 .  !_  1 .  A  division  of  s  rvereignty 
illustrated  by  the  exchange  of  Sover- 
eign rights,  often  involved  in  Treaties 
between  independent  nations.  :;:i:;, 
394.  And  in  Confederacies,  particu- 
larly in  that  which  precede  1  the  pres- 

enl  Constituti )f  U.S.,  393.  394.    Ah 

the  States.,  in  their  highest  Sovereign 
character,  were  competent  to  surren- 
der the  whole  Sovereignty,  and  form 
tin  mselves  into  a  consolidated  State, 
so  they  might  surrender  a  part  ami 
retain     the    other    part.      391.       This 

they  have  done,  forming  a  division 
of  its  attributes  as  marked  out  in  the 
Constitution  of  I'.  S.,  391.  New  doc- 
trine, which  supposes  t'n  ii  Sover 

ty  is  in  its  nature  indivisible  :  ami 
that  the  Sovereignty  of  each  of  the 
which  formed  the  <  Constitution- 
al compact  of  the  United  S  ates,  re- 
in lins  absolute  and  entire,  391. 
Some    contend    that      il    render-     the 

States  individually  the  permanent  ex- 
positors of  the  true   meaning  of  tho 


070 


GENERA],     INDEX 


[  S  0  v 


Constitution  itself,  391.  Source  of 
this  discord  of  opinions,  39 1.  Con- 
siderations to  be  kept  in  mind  in  sett- 
ling it,  391.  A  suggested  ground  of 
compromise,  391.  :>;i2.  'I  he  the 
ins  of  a  social  compact  supposes  tbe 
free  consenl  of  every  individual  :  and 
further,  either  that  it  was  a  pari  of 

ih 'iginal  compact,  that  the  will  oi 

the  majority  was  to  be  de<  med  the 
will  of  the  whole,  or  thai  Ibis  was  a 
law  of  nature,  resulting  from  the  na- 
ture of  political  society  .  itself  the  off- 
spr/ng  of  the  natural  wants  of  men. 
:;</j.  [See  "  Majorities."']  A  major- 
ity of  a  Society  lias,  and  been  univer- 
sally regarded  as  having  a  righl  to  do 
so,  not  only  naturalized,  (admitted 
into  tbe  social  compact  again,)  but 
lias  divided  the  Sovereignty  of  the 
society  itself  into  distinct  societies. 
equally  Sovereign,  393.  Examples  of 
this  operation  in  the  separation  of 
Kentucky  from  Virginia,  and  of 
Maine  from  Massachusetts,  393.  In 
the  ease  of  Naturalization,  a  new 
member  is  added  to  the  social  com- 
pact, not  only  without  a  nnanimous 
consent  of  the  members,  but  by  a 
majority  of  the  governing  body,  de- 
riving its  consent  from  a  majority  of 
the  individual  parties  to  the  social 
compact,  393.  Not  denied  thai  two 
Stales  equally  Sovereign  might  be  in- 
corporated into  one  by  the  voluntary 
and  joint  act  of  majorities  only  in 
each.  393.  Constitution  of  U.  S.  lias 
provided  for  this  contingency.  [Art. 
4.  sec.  3.]  IN'.  393.  If  two  States 
could  thus  incorporate  themselves  in- 
to one  by  a  mutual  surrender  of  the 
entire  Sovereignty  of  each,  why 
might  not  a  partial  incorporation,  by 
a  partial  surrender  of  Sovereignty, 
be  equalh  practicable,  if  equally  el- 
igible? 393.  If  this  could  be  done 
by  two  Slates,  why  not  by  twenty  or 
more?  393.  In  fact,  tbe  Constitu- 
tion of  U.  S.  has  divided  Sovereignty, 
394.  It  has  done  so  by  an  act  ot  the 
majority  of  the  People  in  each  State. 

in  their  highest  Sovereign  capacity, 
equivalent  to  a  unanimous  act  of  the 
State  in  that  capacity,  39  I.  The  idea 
of  Sovereignty  as  divided  between 
the  Union  and  the  members  compris- 
ing the  Union  forces  itself  into  the 
view,  and  even  into  the  language,  of 
strenuous  advocates  of  the  unity  ami 


indivisibility  of  tbe  moral  being  crea- 
ted l>_\  tic-  social  compact.  EDxample, 
394.  Contrast  between  the  > a-- 
e  of  subjection  to  ;i  foreign  Sov- 
ereignty .  ami  the  equal  and  recipro- 
cal mm  render  of  portions  of  ma  er- 
eignty  by  compacts  anion-  Sovereign 
communities,  395.  Fortunate  attri- 
butes of  all  free  Governments  in  the 
moulding  and  distributing,  &c,  id'  the 
powers  of  Government   by  those  on 

whom  they  are  In  opeiate.  395.  Tes- 
timony of  Jefferson  to  the  Sovereignty 
of  U.S.,  421-  illustration  from  tb< 
case  of  Burr,  421.  Supposed  cases 
of  impunity  to  treason,  if  there  be 
no  Sovereignty  in  U.  S.,  121.  Sover- 
eignty in  them  the  only  foundation  of 
their  international  relation-  w  ith  for- 
eign Governments,  422.  The  old 
( lonfederacj  held  <\<  facto  lo  be  a  na- 
tion, 422.  The  denier-  of  the  possi- 
bility of  a  political  system,  with  a  di- 
vided Sovereignty,  like  thai  of  U.  S., 
must  (dmose  between  a  Government 
purely  Consolidated  and  an  associa- 
tion of  Governments  purely  Federal, 
424.  Lessons  of  history  a-  to  each. 
424.  The  failure  of  the  experiment 
ol  the  old  Confederation,  while  it 
proved  the  frailty  of  men-  Federal 
ism,  proved  also  the  frailties  of  Re- 
publicanism without  the  control  of  a 
Federal  organization,  424.  All  the 
rights  of  Sovereignty  are  intended 
for  the  benefit  of  those  from  whom 
they  are  derived,  and  over  whom 
they  are  exercised.  -J-Jl.  442,  The 
Sovereignty  of  the  King  of  England, 
did  not  extend  to  U.  S.,  while  they 
remained  a  part  of  the  British  empire, 
in  virtue  of  his  being  acknowledged 
Ac.,  bj  the  People  of  England,  Ac 
but  in  virtue  of  his  being  acknowl- 
edged, Ac.,  as  King  by  tin1  People  of 
America  themselves,  442. 

Spaffohd,  II.  G  .  Letter  to  : 
.">  December.  1822,  111.  288. 
His   project   of  a    <  lazetteer  of  Va.. 
LIf.  272.     His  process  tor  giving   in- 
creased purity  and  cheapness  to  steel 
and  iron.  288.    [Sec  III.  272.] 

Spaffokd.  Mb.,  III.  34. 

Spain.  Her  true  interest  a-  to  the 
navigation  of  the  Mississippi,  1.93  — 
95,  '.'T.  Suggested  provision  for  ad- 
justment of  disputes.  98.  Acquies- 
cence of  a  Spanish  <  }ov<  i  nor  of  N. 
Orleans  in  a  British  proceeding 


s  r  a  —  s  x  a  ] 


C  E  N  E  l:  A  I.     !  X  I)  E  X 


GT1 


Contest  will)  Spain.  :  Supposed  con- 
trariety "I'  interests  ami  rights,  121. 
Her  repugnance  to  an  amicable  regu- 
lation of  the  use  of  the  Mississippi, 
137,  138,  1  19,  150.  Hit  position,  246. 
2  i7.  Treaty  with  I  .  S.,  II.  7:;.  77.  78. 
mi.  81,  82,  85,  B6,  '.!,  95.  Spanish 
officers  ai  X.  Orleans,  203.  Spain 
musl  ultimately  confess  her  responsi- 
bility lor  J  rench  injuries.  Her  proud 
and  perverse  condu'et,  215.  Her  ha- 
tred i"  U.  S.,  394.  Her  prond  ami 
vindictive  ( iovernment,  III.  22.  Ha- 
bitual mean  cunning,  34.  Folly,  165. 
Her  disposition  not  to  break  with  V. 
S.,  112.  [See  !.  290,  318.  392,  154, 
494,  509,  526,  575.  II.  1  16'.  123,  124. 
17"..  177.  180,  182,  186,  203,  209,  213, 
219.  223,  159,  60L.  111.  21,  24,  29, 
!)7,  98,  99,  111,  112.  lit;.  117.  189. 
199,  268.  310,  329,  330,  336,  340,  348! 
391,  166,  l7o.  628,  653.  IV.  :U7.  I  11 
—  417.  ;>()!.  .Mi:'..  .Mid  —  5(14.] 
Spanish  America,  11.  I  hi.  488,  520, 
521.  1)1.  45,  !)7.  111.  112,  lis.  267, 
339,  602. 

Spares,  Jared,  Letters  to: 
:;d  Maj .  1827,  Hi.  582 

,'p  January  . 

8  Vpril,  ' 

5  ( Ictober, 

8  April. 

1  June, 
25  Xo\  ember. 
His  purpose  of  composing  an  authen- 
tic History  of  the  American  Revolu- 
tion, 111.  583,  609,  610.      His  success 
at  London  and  Paris  in  obtaining  ma- 
terials, nowhere  else  to  be  found,  es- 
sential to  the  History  of  the  Ameri- 
can Revolution,  IV.  68,  83.     His  pro- 
posed edition  of  Washington's  writ- 
ings, 17  1. 
S     rta,  I.  394. 
Specie  inculation,  TIT.  33. 
••  Spectator,  The,"  IV.  1,  2. 
"  Speculation,   The"  Case  of  the  Dan- 
ish vessel,  11.  343. 

Speculators  and  Tories.   Licentiousness 
of  their  tongues,  I.  535. 
Spekce,  Dr.,  Report  of  Ids  captivity  in 

Algiers.  I.  121. 

Spirit  of  Governments,  IV.  17 1.  175. 
Division  of  Governments,  according 
to  their  predominant  spirit  and  prin- 
ciples, into  three  species,  -17  I.  l.  <  tp- 
erating  by  a  permanent  military 
force,  -174.  2.  Operating  by  corrupt 
influence.    471.    177).      o.  Deriving  its 


1828, 

■• 

608 

1830, 

IV. 

114 

1831, 

•• 

168 
181 
201 

energy  from  the  will  of  Hie  Society, 
and  operating  bj  the  reason  of  its 
measures,  on  the  understanding  and 
interest  of  the  Society .  175. 

I  Lis  speech,  February 
2.  :;.  I8"i0,  in  U.  S.  Senate  on  Foot's 
Resolution,  IV.  69,  70. 

Sri:iGG,  Lin  hard,  Jr.,  II.  135. 

Siitiua,  Mr.,- .  I.  Ml. 

Spring,  Rev.  S.,  I.i.n  erto  : 
6  September,  1812,  II.  54  I. 

"Squatting"  on  Public  Land,  IH.  40. 

Stadlholdei',  I.  307,  347. 

Stamp  Act,  II.  130. 

S     \ding  Army,  1.  127.     II.  in. 

Stantan,   Thomas,    His   ••  Account   of 
Switzerland."  I.  300,  301. 

Stark,  Gen.  John,  I.i.ti  isk  to  : 
in  December.  1819,  III.  161. 
Hi-  character  and  services  in  the  war 
of  Independence,  I II.  161. 

Starke,  Boijjng,  1.  262. 

Debts.      [See  "Assumption  op 
State  Debts."] 

States  op  the  Union.   [Sc Coercion 

or  Tin:  States,"  "Compact,"  ''Con- 
federacy," ••  Constitution  of  D.  S.," 
"Sovereignty,"  Names  or  the  Sev- 
eral States,  &c,  Ac]  Their  indi- 
vidual independence  irreconcilable 
with  their  aggregate  Sovereignty,  and 
their  consolidation  into  one  simple 
Republic  inexpedient  as  it  is  unattain- 
able, I.  287.  Failure  to  comply  with 
Constitutional  requisitions,  319,  320. 
Encroachments  on  Federal  authority, 
320.  Violations  of  the  law  of  nation-., 
and  of  treaties.  320.  Trespasses  on 
the  rights  of  each  other.  Want  of 
concert,  321.  Want  of  guaranty  of 
their  Constitutions  and  laws  against 
interna]  violence,  322.  Want  of  sanc- 
tion of  the  laws,  and  of  coercion  in 
the  Government  of  the  Confederacy, 

322.  Want  of  ratification  by  the  Peo- 
ple of  the  Articles  id'  Confederation, 

323,  324.  .Multiplicity,  mutability, 
and  injustice  of  their  laws.  324,  :',_.">. 
351.  < 'auses  id'  this  injustice.  325, 
326,  327.  Unwise  Ac  proceedings 
of  the  Governments  of  some  States. 
330.  Reasons  against  their  consoli- 
dation into  one  Government,  IV.  158. 
Right  of  the  Legislatures  to  interfere 
by  declaration  of  opinion  respecting 
Federal  acts.  11.  150.  153.  111.  513. 
A  junto  in  the  Eastern  States  in  favor 
of  Disunion,  II.  427.  The  federal 
patronage  of  the  maritime  rights  and 


072 


G  E  N  ER  A  L    I  X  |>  E  X 


[  B  X  A 


interests  of  the  Eastern  States  the 
chiel  obstacle  I"  a  commercial  Treaty 
between  I  .  S.  and  G.  C.  428.  Delu- 
sion brought  on  (he  people  o1  the 
Eastern  Stales,  593,  £94.  Their  ex- 
perience as  to  ;i  Government  "  ii ■ 

centre,''  111.  41.  Questions  respect- 
ing the  admission  of  new  States.  153. 
Importance,  Ac.  that  the  Constitu- 
tional boundary  between  the  authori- 
ties (  f  the  I  nion  and  those  oi  the 
States  should  be  impartially  main- 
tained, 217.  [See  III.  326,  327,  569.] 
Spirit  of  usurpation  by  some  of  the 
Si  ales,  and  theoretic  innovations  giv- 
ing undue  weight  to  the  Federal  Sov- 
ereignty, III.  218.  Admission  of  new 
States,  218.  State  Codes.  233.  En- 
croachments on  the  powers  of  the 
general  Government,  and  vice  versa, 
246.  Protesl  l>\  a  State,  and  instruc- 
tions In  her  Representatives  in  Cong- 
ress, 508,  509.  Proceedings  of  cer- 
tain State  Conventions  on  the  Consti- 
tution of  D.  S.,  54 1.  [See  III.  634.] 
Not  altogether  foreign  to  each  other, 
IV.  18.  Their  resources  against  the 
( leneral  ( lovernment,  while  no  cor- 
responding control  exists  in  the  Gen- 
eral Government  in  regard  to  the 
Stale  Governments,  19,  20,  13,  76,  99, 
101,  2!)G.  The  condition  of  certain 
Slates,  if  portions  containing  their 
great  commercial  cities,  invoking  ori- 
ginal rights  as  paramount  to  social 
and  Constitutional  compacts,  should 
erect  themselves  into  distinct  and  ab- 
solute Sovereignties.  Similar  evils  to 
some  of  the  Stales  from  a  separation 
of  its  neighbors  into  absolute  and 
alien  Sovereignties,  65.  Condition  of 
the  Union  and  other  members  of  it. 
if  a  single  member  could  at  will  re- 
nounce its  connexion.  Ac.  &C,  225. 
States  having  no  commercial  ports  of 
their  own.  225.  Discontent  in  the 
Southern  Stales  with  the  Tariff  and 
the  expenditures  on  Roads  and  Ca- 
nals, 140.  Tower  of  a  State  to  make 
banks.  160.  The  State  Judiciaries 
can  be  kept  in  their  Constitutional 
career  onh  bj  control  of  the  Federal 
Judiciary,  196.  Obvious  necessity  of 
a  control  on  the  laws  of  the  Slates. 
so  far  as  they  might  violate  the  <  '.in- 
stitution and  laws  of  the  I'.  S.,  208, 
211.  .Modes  presented  to  the  federal 
Convention  of  effecting  it  :  1 .  A  veto 
on   the  passage  of  State  Laws.     2.  A 


Congressional  repeal  of  tbem.  3.  A 
Judicial  annulment  of  them.  208. 
Deprecation  [  in  1832]  of  a  Southern 
Convention.  2  16,  2  17.  Project  of  one 
insidiously  revived,  301.  State  Sov- 
ereignty, 226.  Possible  coin 
substitution  of  articles  respectively 
furnished  by  the  North  and  the  South, 
for  a  foreign  commerce,  265,  266. 
Novel  and  nullifying  doctrine  of  S. 
Carolina,  that  the  States  never  parted 
with  an  atom  of  their  Sovereignty, 
289,  303.  Preposterousness  of  the 
doctrine,  that  the  Stales  as  United, 
are  in  no  respect  or  degree  a  nation, 
which  implies  Sovereignty,  t! 
maintaining  all  the  international  re- 
lations of  war.  peace,  treaties,  com- 
merce. Ac.  with  all  other  nation.'-  and 
sovereigns;  and.  on  the  other  hand, 
and  at  the  same  time,  that  the  . 
separately  are  completely  nations  and 
Sovereigns,  though  they  can  separ- 
ately neither  speak  nor  hearken  to 
any  oiher  nation,  nor  maintain  with 
it  any  of  the  international  relations 
whatever,  and  would  lie  disowned  aa 
na1  mi-  ii  presenting  themselves  in 
that  character.  290,  321.  Admission 
ol'  new  Stales,  171.  393.  Treaties 
made  b\  the  Stales.  :'.o:'..  Their  UNION 
to    lie  ••  CHERISHED  A.\H  PERPETUATED," 

437. 
States  General,  I.  304. 
Statistical  Inquirh-s.  Ac.  1.  527,536. 
Stature,     Ac     Instances   of    superior 
height  and  weight.  III.  194. 

Steel,  .Mi;.. .  III.  28. 

Stenographer.      Proposition  to  employ 

one  for  H.  1!..  II.  75. 
Stephens,  Gen.  A..  I.  387. 

Stephens,  Dr., .  II.  26. 

Stevens,  Gen.   Edward,    I.   -Ml).    An 

elector  lor  I'.  and  V.  1'..   157. 
Stevenson,  Andrew,  Lettebsto: 
25  March,  1826,  III.  520 

2  May,  1.^27.    "     578 

27  November,     1830,  IV.  120 
27  November,       ••     121,  134 
I  February,      1833,  IV.  269 
in  February,        "       "     272 
[See  III.  196,  201,  <;5f,.     IV.  Hi).] 
Stewart,  Andrew,  III.  660. 
Stewart,  Mits.,  III.  420. 
Stock  speculations,  I.  540.   541.  550, 

552. 

Stokes, ,  Governor  of  N.  Caroli- 
na. Letter  to  : 
15  July.  1831,  IV.  190. 


S  T  0  —  8  W  I  ] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


G73 


Stone,  T.,  I.  165. 

Stonington,  111.  419,  420. 

Storrow,  Col., ,  III.  008.    IV.  08. 

Strong,  Caleb,  a  delegate  from  Mass- 
achusetts tn  the  Federal  Convention, 
I.  282.  A  Senator  from  Massachu- 
setts, 442,  Governor  of  Massachu- 
setts, II.  225. 

Strother,French,  I.  583. 

STROTHER,  William.  I.  330. 

Stuart,  A..  I.  357,  3-7.  597. 

Stuart,  Dr.  I i  win.  I.  3,^7.  An  elector 
for  P.  and  V.  I'..  457.    [See  II.  4:',.] 

Stuart,  Gen., .  III.  415.  (181 1.) 

Stuart,  Mil. .  I.  87.  108.  (1784.) 

Subscriptions  to  the  stock  of  private 
companies  "by  the  U.  S.."  IV.  92. 

Suffrage.  Middle  course  between 
freehold  and  universal  suffrage,  I. 
181,  187.  Considerations  in  favor  of 
the  ballot.  181,  187,  1*8.  Freehold 
suffrage,  IV.  21.  22,  2,">.  Universal 
suffrage.  26,  -7.  The  Federal  princi- 
ple the  best  expedient  for  securing 
the  rights  of  persons  with  and  with- 
out property,  21.  Distribution  of  the 
right  of  suffrage  in  New  York  and 
North  Carolina,  20.  Extension  of  the 
right  of  suffrage  to  housekeepers  and 
heads  id'  families,  28.  Relation  of  the 
progress  of  population.  Ac,  to  the 
question  of  suffrage,  28  —  30.  Right 
of  suffrage  a  fundamental  in  a  free 
Government,  and  ought  to  be  fixed 
by  the  Constitution,  385. 

Sugar  Tree,  1.  234. 

Sullivan,  James,  Governor  of  Massa- 
chusetts, II.  225.     IV.  32,  n. 

Sullivan.  John.  President  of  New 
Hampshire.  I.  308.     IV.  441. 

Sumner,  W.  II.,  Letter  to? 
20  June.  182:5,  III.  322. 

Sumptuary  regulations ,  II.  14. 

Sumter,  Gen.  Thomas,  IV.  207. 

Supreme  Court  or  U.  S.  [See  "  Judic- 
iary Department,"  "  Pendleton,  Ed- 
mund.'' "  Taylor,  John.'-']  To  decide 
controversies  concerning  the  bounda- 
ries of  power  between  the  General 
Government  and  the  State  Govern- 
ments, IV.  111.  43.  47.  48.  41).  02.  63, 
75,  70.  100,  101.  222.  This  jurisdic- 
tion the  only  defensive  armor  of  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  U.  S.  Were 
they  strip t  of  it,  the  door  would  be 
wide  open  for  nullification,  anarchy, 
and  convulsion,  unless  24  States,  in- 
dependent of  the  whole  and  of  each 
other,  should  exhibit  the  miracle  of  a 


voluntary  and  unanimous  perform- 
ance 'if  every  injunction  of  the 
parchment  compact,  296,  297,  322. 
Remedies  for  usurpation  on  the  part 
of  the  Supreme  <  lourt,  \'K  1 19,  Sense 
and  degree  in  which  the  Judicial  De- 
partment is  more  particularly  de- 
scribed as  a  Constitutional  resort  in 
deciding  questions  of  jurisdiction  be- 
tween P.  S.  and  the  individual  Slates, 
31!).  350.  In  the  discussions  growing 
out    of  the   P.   S.   laws,  it  was  alleged 

that  a  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  U.  S.  was  a  bar  to  the  interposition 
of  the  Slates,  even  to  declarations  of 
Legislative  opinion, 209.  The  Supreme 
Court's  latitudinary  mode  of  construing 
the  Constitution  of  U.  S.  in  the  case  of 
McCulloh  vs.  Maryland,  III.  143,  144, 
I  !.">.  146.  Want  of  seriatim  opinions 
by  the  Judges,  143,  293,  327.  Its  de- 
cision in  217.  Practice  of  min- 
gling with  their  judgments  comments 
&c,  of  a  scope  beyond  them,  ftc., 
217.  Their  late  doctrines.  219.  220. 
Their  partial  reference  to  "  The  Fed- 
eralist." 220.  Their  neglect  of  the 
11th  Amendment  to  Const.  U.  S.,  221. 
Ought  to  be  relieved  from  Circuit  du- 
ties, and  established  at  the  seat  of 
Government.  A  reduction  of  the  num- 
ber of  Judges  suggested,  293,  523, 
524.     [See  IV.  230,  313.  400.] 

Supreme  law,  Meaning  of  the  phrase  as 
applied  to  Treaties.  I.  524. 
nder  of  deserters,  II.  100. 

Surrender  of  Fugitives.  Case  threatened 
by  the  eagerness  of  disorderly  citi- 
zens for  Spanish  plunder  and  Spanish 
blood.  Proposition  to  authorize  Con- 
gress to  surrender  fugitives  in  cer- 
tain cases,  &c,  I.  111.  Act  of  Vir- 
ginia. 129. 

Surrender  of  malefactors.  Want  of  a 
Constitutional  provision  on  the  sub- 
ject.  111.  2211. 

Survey.  [See  ••  Virginia."]  Surveys 
of  the  Potomac  and  James  rivers,  I. 
101).  Survey  of  ground  for  a  canal 
between  the  waters  of  Elizabeth  riv- 
er, and  those  of  N.  Carolina.  120. 

Swan.  Mr., ,  II.  40,  00.  92,  184. 

SwANWICE,  Joun,  II.  5,  19,  20. 

SwartwouTj  Gex.  Robert,  III.  420. 
Sweden.     I.   391.    II.  500,  505.    III. 

210,  215,  650. 
Swift,  Jonathan',  (Dean)  I.  271. 
Switzerland,     Governments    in,    IV. 

407. 


VOL.    IV. 


43 


C74 


GENERAL     INDEX 


[  T  A  L  —  TAR 


"Talk,"    to    Indians,   II.    553  —  55C. 

III.  488,  490. 
Talleyrand  Perigord,  Charles  Maur- 
ice de,  II.  123.  Depravity  and  stu- 
pidity of  liis  conduct,  13:5/134. 
Tammany  Address,  III.  158. 
Tappahannock,  a  port  of  entry.  I.  87. 
Tariff.  [See  "Constitution  of  U. 
S.,"  "Confederacy,"  "Manufac- 
tures," "  Soi  tii  Cakotina.'7  "  Virgin- 
ia."] The  general  principle  is  to 
leave  to  the  sagacity  and  interest  of 
individuals  the  free  choice  of  their  in- 
dustrious pursuits.  Exceptions.  III. 
427,  428,  431,  432,  441,  C48.  Incon- 
gruity, in  an  Act  for  encouraging 
manufactures,  of  a  tax  on  raw  materi- 
als, 428.  Non-interference  the  duty 
of  the  Government  in  doubtful  cases. 
430,048.  Tariff  of  1824.  Its  insuffi- 
cient regard  of  the  general  princi- 
ple of  Free  Industry,  430.  Its  con- 
jectured operation,  432.  Meaning  in 
Constitution  of  U.  S.  of  the  "  Power 
to  regulate  commerce,"  571.  Applied 
by  every  existing  Commercial  nation, 
and  especially  by  G.  B.  to  the  encour- 
aging of  particular  domestic  occupa- 
tions. 571.  638.  039.  054.  IV.  243, 
254.  By  the  States  most  prepared  for 
manufacturing  industry  while  retain- 
ing the  power  over  their  foreign 
Trade.III.039.  Experienced  inefficacy 
of  the  power  in  relation  to  manufac- 
tures, etc.,  when  exercised  by  the 
States  separately,  among  the  induce- 
ments, &c,  for  revising  the  old  Con- 
federation, and  transferring  the  pow- 
er from  the  States  to  the  Government, 
of  U.  S.,  571,  572,  639,  054.  IV.  254. 
In  the  interval  between  the  peace  of 
1783  and  the  establishment  of  the 
present  Constitution  of  I'.  S.  the  want 
of  a  general  authority  to  regulate 
trade,  had  the  consequence  of  its  be- 
ing regulated  by  other  nations  into  a 
subserviency  to  a  foreign  interest. 
III.  049.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed 
that  any  of  the  States  meant  to  annl- 
hUate  the  power  of  encouraging  par- 
ticular domestic  occupations.  572. 
Inference;  as  to  the  intention  of  the 
framers  of  the  Constitution.  IV.  2  1  I. 
Objections  to  the  supposition  that  the 
States  looked  to  the  resource  of  en- 
couraging their  own  manufactures 
when    the   Constitution  was   formed, 


III.  572.  Reference  to  printed  Jour- 
nal of  the  Convention  of  17>7  .  Pro- 
ceedings of  the  Slate  Conventions, 
Proceedings  and  Debates  of  the  First 
Congress  :  and  Virginia  Resolutions 
proposed  in  Congress  in  1793  -  "4,  as 
probably  showing  that  the  power  was 

generally,  perhaps  universally,  re- 
garded as  indisputable,  572,  ."'7:';.  .Mi], 
642,655.  IV.  244,322.  'I  lie  power  exer- 
cised or  admitted  throughout  suc- 
ceeding  Congresses,  till  a  verv  late 
date.  572.  592,  612.  655.  IV.  322 
Extracts  from  debates  in  the  II.  R. 
of  the  First  Congress,  244,245  246. 
The  Congress  which  first  met  contain- 
ed 16  members,  8  of  them  in  II.  i;. 
fresh  from  the  Convention  which 
framed  the  Constitution,  and  a  con- 
siderable number  who  had  been  mem- 
bers of  the  State  Convention--  which 
had  adopted  it.  taken  as  well  from 
the  party  which  opposed,  as  from 
those  who  had  espoused,  it-  adoption. 
Yet  it  appears  from  the  Debates  in  II. 
R.  (those  in  the  Senate  not  having 
been  taken.)  that  not  a  doubt  of  the 
power  was  started.  217.  The  pow- 
er recognised  by  every  President  of 
U.  S.  from  Washington  to  J.  Q. 
Adams,  inclusive.    III.  573,591,655. 

IV.  248.  Washington,  who  was  Presi- 
dent of  the  Convention  and  signed 
the  Constitution  as  1'.  C.  S..  signed  a 
bill  passed  at  the  1st.  Session  of  the 
First  Congress,  which  expressly  avow- 
ed that  the  encouragement  of  manu- 
factures was  an  object  of  the  Tariff 
imposed  by  it,  217.  Answer  to  the 
objection  that  this  particular  clause 
was  not  repeated  in  any  succeding 
preamble  to  a  like  law.  247.  2  is. 
Virginia  the  only  State  that  now  de- 
nies, or  ever  did  deny,  the  power  : 
and  this  with  exceptions  resting  on  a 
greater  latitude  of  construction,  III. 
573.  591,  592,  642.  Propositions 
made  by  three  of  her  members  in  the 
First  Congress,  of  protective  duties, 
IV.  247.  Proposition  in  II.  of  Dele- 
gates of  Va..  January  2,  1786,  for 
giving  Congress  power  over  Trade. 
111.  584,  585.  Proposition  in  the 
First  Congress  by  a  member  from  S. 
Carolina,  for  a  protection  duty  on 
hemp,  IV.  247.  The  Constitutionality 
ot  a  tariff  for  encouraging  domestic 
manufactures,  accords  with  the  origi- 
nal interpretation  of  the  charter  and 


tab] 


GENERAL     INDEX. 


G75 


the  long  established  practice  trader  it, 
li I.  63b.  Power  in  <  iongress  "  i<>  lay 
and  colled  taxes,"  &c,  expressed  "ea 
■im'Kiii  cautela."  le  included  in  the 
power  ■•  in  regulate  commerce,"  <i:;~. 
The  negatn  e  of  this  proposition  nol 
to  be  inferred  from  the  distinction 
made  in  the  original  controversy  with 
<;.  B.,  between  a  power  t<.>  regulate 
trade  witli  the  Colonies  and  a  power 
to  tax  them,  (i">.s.  Considerations 
showing  thai  the  "  power  to  regulate 
commerce  with  foreign  nations."  em- 
braces tin'  object  of  encouraging  bj 
duties.  &c,  domestic  manufactures 
and  products,  638  —  643.  1\  .  9,  10. 
Violent  presumption  thai  a  power 
for  the  encouragement  of  domestic 
manufactures  is  a  Federal  power, 
25u.  Surprising  proposition  to  sub- 
stitute for  the  power  of  <  longress  a 
power  in  the  Slates  with  its  consent, 
to  regulate  trade  so  as  to  encourage 
manufactures,  111.  643.  Mockery  of 
the  suggestion  as  to  the  existing 
States  in  view  of  its  experienced  im- 
practicability, HI.  646  —  647,  and  as 
to  the  anticipated  States  from  their 
being  without  potts  of  entry,  IV. 
252.  Misconstruction  of  10th  Sec. 
of  Art.  1.  Const.  D  S.,  G43,G44.  IV. 
Lou.  Surprise  that  the  Constitutional 
power  to  give  legislative  encourage- 
ment through  tlio  custom  house  to 
manufacturing  industry,  should  at 
this  day  be  denied,  6.  [See  III.  195. 
619.  IV.  12,  14,  43,  210,  231,  232, 
301,  322,  liiD.]  Cases  in  which  the 
Constitutional  power  to  impose  duties 
Ar,  on  imports  with  a  view  to  en- 
courage domestic  productions  may  be 
usefully  exercised  by  Congress,  III. 
648  654.  The  "  Let  us  alone'"  the- 
ory chimerical  ly  supposes  universal 
free  trade,  648,  649;  and  perpetual 
peace,  651.  [V.  67,  146,  301,  387, 
388.  Exceptions  to  the  general  rule  : 
1.  Measures  counteracting  those  of  a 
foreign  power  in  derogation  of  the 
rule  of  reciprocity,  Hi.  648-  651. 
IV.  235,  236.  2.  An  estimate,  in  eve- 
ry given  case,  of  war  and  peace  peri- 
ods and  prices,  with  inferences  there- 
from, of  the  amount  of  a  tariff  which 
might  be  afforded  during  peace,  in 
order  to  avoid  the  tax  resulting  from 
war.  III.  651,  652.  IV.  2f>8.  3.  Mu- 
nitions of  public  defence  ;  materials 
essential  to  the  naval  force  of  nations  | 


having  a  maritime  frontier  or  a  for- 
eign commerce  to  protect  :  and  in- 
struments of  agriculture  and  mechan- 
ic arts,  III.  652.  4.  Certain  branches 
of  manufactures  in  a  nascent  state, 
652,  653.  5.  Regulations  to  parry  for- 
eign  attempts  to  strangle  in  the 
cradle  infant  manufactures,  A..  n.">:;. 
6.  The  attracting  of  Bkilful  laborers 
fnun  abroad,  653,  654.  Answer  to 
the  objection  that  duties  and  imposts 
are  in  the  clause  of  the  Constitution 
specifying  the  sources  of  Revenue, 
and  therefore  cannot  lie  applied  to 
the  encouragement  of  manufactures 
when  not  a  source  of  Revenue,  656, 
657,  658.  IV.  234.  Difficulties  to  be 
met  bv  deniers  of  the  power  in  ques- 
tion, 111.  658.  IV.  234.  Their  con- 
cessions,  235,  241,242.  Answer  to 
their  citation  of  Jefferson's  authority, 
ill.  659,  660.  Ferment  in  S.  Caroli- 
na caused  by  the  Tariff  of  1828.  662. 
Considerations  on  imposts  not  for 
revenue.  IV.  ill.  Great  exaggera- 
tion of  tin-  evils  charged  on  the  exist- 
ing tariff.  144,  145,  193.  Causes  of 
the  pervading  embarrassments,  145, 
146.  Influence  of  a  period  of  war  or 
of  peace  on  public  opinion  as  to  the 
question  of  a  protective  policy.  146. 
The  Tariff  in  its  present  amount  ami 
form,  a  source  of  deep  and  extensive 
discontent,  210,  218.  Alleged  ine- 
quality in  its  operation.  219.  Sug- 
gestion of  a  proceeding  for  restoring 
equality,  21!),  Influence  from  the  al- 
leged operation  of  the  repeal  of  the 
duty  on  Tea.  Arc,  219.  Justice  ami 
practicability  of  some  ecpialising  ar- 
rangement. 219,  220.  Possible  assim- 
ilation of  the  employment  of  labor 
a i  the  South  to  its  employment  at  the 
North,  567,  5G8.  Two  objections  an- 
swered. 221).  The  Constitutional  pow- 
er of  Congress  over  commerce,  not 
asserted  to  extend  to  the  occupations 
of  tradesmen,  233.  The  words 
"  trade  "  and  "  commerce  "  used  in- 
discriminately, both  in  books  and  in 
conversation,  233.  Discriminating 
laws  of  G.  13.  againsf  the  navigation 
of  U.  S.  and  abortive  retaliating 
measures  of  Virginia.  235,  '-':)ii.  Ex- 
amination of  proposed  limitations  on 
retaliatory  or  countervailing  regula- 
tions  against  foreign  restrictions,  235, 
—  241.  Sanctions  by  the  Judiciary, 
249.     If  Congress  has  not  the  power, 


676 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[TAU —  TAX 


it  is  annihilated  for  the  nation  :  a  pol- 
icy without  example  in  any  other  na- 
tion, and  not  within  the  reason  of  the 
solitary  one  in  our  own.  III.  640. 
IV.  24*!),  250,  253,  254.  The  Tariff 
lias  losi  none  of  its  unpopularity,  367. 
Experienced  incapacity  of  the  Stales 
separately  to  regulate  their  foreign 
commerce.  251.  Foreseen  existence 
of  the  present  inland  States.  251,  252. 
New  Slates  in  embryo  on  the  North 
side  of  the  Ohio,'  IV.  252.  At- 
tempts to  show  from  the  Journal 
of  the  Federal  Convention  that  it.  was 
intended  to  withhold  from  Congress 
a  power  to  protect  manufactures  by 
commercial  regulations,  253.  Falla- 
cy of  inferences  drawn  from  the  rejec- 
tion or  not  adopting  of  particular 
propositions,  without  knowing  the 
reasons  for  the  votes.  253.  254.  The 
great  object  of  the  Convention  was 
to  provide,  by  a  new  Constitution,  a 
remedy  for  the  defects  of  the  existing 
one.  Among  these  delects  was  that 
of  a  power  to  regulate  foreign  c;  m- 
merce.  254.  Answer  to  objection 
founded  on  a  passage  in  the  Federal- 
ist, 255.  256.  Answer  to  objection 
that  if  Congress  can  impose  duties  to 
protect  American  industry  against 
foreign  competition.  Congress  may 
impose  duties  to  protect  the  industry. 
&c.  of  the  States  against  the  compe- 
tition of  each  other,  257.  Public  mo- 
tives for  the  support  of  a  protective 
tariff.  258.  259.  Exaggerated  effects 
ascribed  to  the  Tariff,  259,  260,  277, 
278.  Real  causes  of  the  depression 
complained  of  in  the  Southern  States, 
260,  261.  Public  discontents  have 
proceeded  more  from  the  inequality 
of  the  Tariff,  than  from  the  weight  of 
its  pressure,  and  more  from  the  exag- 
gerations of  both  than  from  the  reali- 
ty, 2(12.  Error  that  the  capitals  of 
the  manufacturers  are  the  offspring  of 
the  Tariff,  263,  264.  Insufficiency,  in 
its  full  extent,  of  their  plea  appeal- 
ing to  the  public  faith,  2t>4.  Room 
for  equitable  compromises,  &c,  264. 
Approaching  diminution  of  the  differ- 
ence of  the  employment  of  capital 
and  labor  at  the  North  and  at  the 
South,  2(14.  Cautions  under  which  a 
reduction  or  modification  of  the  Tar- 
iff laws  should  be  attempted,  271. 
pew's  pamphlet,  274.  The  compro- 
mising Tariff  of  1833,  300,  30ti.  Con- 


siderations favoring  the  prospect  of 
salutary  results  from  it,  300.  Effect 
of  a  war  in  Europe  in  raising  the 
price  of  wages  there,  cud  thus  brac- 
ing the  manufacturing  establishments 
in  CT.  S.,  301.  Alleged  permanent 
incompatibility  of  interests,  in  the 
regulations  of  foreign  commerce,  be- 
tween the  agricultural  and  the  manu- 
facturing population, 320.  Main  divis- 
ion of  the  mass  of  the  People  in  all 
countries  into  the  class  raising  food 
and  raw  materia1?,  and  the  class  pro- 
viding clothing  •  "d  the  other  n 
saries  and  conveniences  ol  life,  330 
Difficulty  of  regnla  ing  their  respect- 
ive interests,  330,  331:  The  fiscal  and 
protective  legislation  ol  G.  B.,  331. 
In  G.  IS.  the  advocates  of  the  protect- 
ive policy  belong  to  the  landed  inter- 
est, and  not,  as  in  U.  S.,  to  the  manu- 
facturing interest  :  though  in  some 
particulars  both  interests  -re  suiters 
for  protection  against  foreign  compe- 
tition, 331.  A  consoling  anticipation. 
A  state  of  things  may  arise,  in  which 
the  conflicts  of  interests  between  the 
agricultural  and  the  manufacturing 
Slates  may  be  succeeded  by  an  inter- 
change of  the  products  profitable  to 
both.  332.  358.  This  would  convert  a 
source  of  discord  among  the  Slates 
into  a  new  cement  of  the  Union,  and 
give  to  the  country  a  supply  of  it-  es- 
sential wants  independent  of  contin- 
gencies and  vicissitudes  incident  to 
foreign  countries.  332,  333. 

Tableton,  Cor..  Banastre.  His  attempt 
to  capture  the  Executive  and  Legis- 
lature of  Virginia,  I.  46. 

Tartars.  111.65,111. 

Tax.  Remission  of  half  the  Virginia 
tax  for  1785.  I.  127.  204.  Tax  on 
transfers  of  land,  and  on  law  pro- 
ceedings, 147.  Proposed  tax  on  law- 
yers, county  court  clerks,  riding  car. 
riages,  coaches,  phaetons,  and  chairs- 
266.  274.  Taxing  of  exports  and  im- 
ports should  be  a  power  of  the  Na- 
tional Government,  288.  Tax  on 
newspapers,  561,  572.  Tax  on  horses, 
57:;.  Its  operation  in  different  places, 
57:;.  574.  Question  of  the  origina- 
tion of  taxes.  |I.  9.  Tax  on  iisurj  as 
such.  14.  lax  on  transfers  18.  Di- 
rect taxes.  "6,  113,  114,  143.  Distil- 
lery tax.  HI.  49,  114.  Impost  on 
wine.  49.  Tax  on  carriages,  II.  14, 
18,  77,  81,  S3  Question  of    ts       Con 


TAY-THK] 


G  i:  N  E  R  A  L     I  X  DEX 


677 


Btitutioriality,  84.  HI.  56.  Self  tax- 
ation the  germ  of  independence,  105. 
Mixed  ratio  <>f  taxation  and  represen- 
tation, agreed  on  in  tl Id  Congress, 

;iml  adopted  in  Constitution  of  U.  S., 
III.  154.  Tax  on  imported  books  an 
impolitic  ami  disreputable  measure, 
2'J'.»,  230.  Petition  to  Congress  lor  its 
repeal,  234.  Tax  on  raw  materials. 
428,  i_'!».  M ere  inequality  in  imposing 
taxes  not  synonymous  with  unconsti 
tut  tonality,  574.  Distinction  between 
tlio  taxing  ami  Hie  appropriating 
power,  IV.  238.  Tax  on  Exports, 
Why  prohibited  in  Constitution  l".  S., 

III.  640.  Recommendation  by  Con- 
gress, in   1783,   of  a  lax  on  Imports. 

IV.  -i  i'.t.  Taxes  proposed  at  the  Qrsl 
Sess.  of  the  Jst.  Congress,  IV.  504. 
505.  [See  I.  218,261,  339,  464.  II. 
11.  S3,  llli,  530.  III.  33,  51.  IV. 
208,  230.] 

1'ayi.oi:.  John,  I.  357,  573,  (502.  II.  26. 
78.  III.  327,564.  IV.  3(1.  His  tal- 
ents, &c,  1. 574,575.  A  celebrated  ag- 
riculturalist, III.  SI.  His  possible  as- 
sociation in  preparing  the  piece  called 
"  The  danger  nol  over,"  IV.  .">.  His 
authority  in  point  for  the  ultimate 
jurisdiction  of  Supreme  Court  U.  S. 
over  the  boundary  between  V.  S.  and 
the  States.  197,  324.  His  "  New 
Views,"  209,  313.  Erroneously  as- 
sumes for  the  term  "National,"  a 
meaning  co-extensive  with  a  single 
consolidated  Government,  20!).  His 
argument  against  the  carriage  tax, 
high  toned  as  to  judicial  power,  Ac., 
230,  35 1.  Regarded  the  control  of 
the  Federal  Judiciary  over  the  State 
laws  as  more  objectionable  than  a. 
Legislative  negative  on  them,  313. 
[Died  August  20,  1824.] 

Taylor,  John,  W.,  Elected  Speaker  of 
H.R.,  III.  186. 

Taylor,  Robert,  IV.  48. 

Taylor,  W.,  III.  47. 

Taylor, ,  of  Kv.,  I.  561. 

Taylor.  Mr..  III.  19. 

Tazewell,  Henry,  I.  88.  II.  2G,  31, 
67,  82.  120.  128. 

Tea.  Alleged  operation  of  the  repeal 
of  the  duty  on  it.  Consequence,  IV.219. 

Teacklk,  Littleton  I).,  Letters  to: 
12  February,  1823.  III.  294 
June.  1824,    "     440 

29  March.        1826.    "    522 

Teft.  J.  K..  Letter  to  : 

3  December,  1S30,  IV.  139. 


Telassu  King,  HI.  399. 

••  Telegraph,  V.  S.,"  [V.394,411,n.,421. 

pe,  I.  l  16. 

Telfair, ,  II.  20. 

Temperance,  IV.  38  t. 

Temperance  Societies,  IV.  310. 

Temple,  Sib  William,  I.  306,,  307,  308. 
ii.  271,  -i::\.  586. 

•■  Temple,"  iv.  iil\ 

Tennessee.  [See  ••  NORTB  CAROLINA.'"] 
II.  522.  III.  11,  12,  393,  399,  400. 
IV.  252. 

Tenure  of  office  during  r/ood  behaviour. 
[See  "Office."]     I.  345. 

Ternay,  Chevalier  de,  at  Rhode  Is- 
land, I.  36. 

Terril, ,  III.  516. 

Territorial  fund,  I.  153. 

Territory.  Power  in  Congress  "to 
make  all  needful  rules  and  regula- 
tions respecting  the  territory  or  other 
property  belonging  to  the  {'.  S.,"  III. 
152.  Undefined  and  irregular  author- 
ity exercised  by  Congress  in  the  Ter- 
ritories, e.  ;/.  Commissions  to  Jndges 
from  lime  to  time,  and  not  during 
good  behaviour,  or  the  continuance 
of  their  offices,  IH.  200.  Authority 
of  Congress  over  the  Territories  un- 
contested, 137. 

Terry.  Ok.  Jesse.  Jr..  Letteb  to: 
30  January.  1822, III.  258. 

■•  Tertiary  formations, "  III.  441. 

Theology,  ill  503,  504,  505. 

Theological  Catalogue  for  the  Library 
of  the  University  of  Va.,  HI.  450. 

"  Theories,  are  the  offspring  of  the 
closet,  exceptions  to  them  the  lessons 
of  experience,"  IV.  259,  388. 

Thermometer,  State  of ,  [See  "Weath- 
er,"] III.  34. 

Thessaly,  Oligarchical  Governments 
in.  IV.  467. 

Thompson,  Mr. ,  I.  62,  443. 

Thomson.  (,'iiari.es.  Secretary  of  tha 
Revolutionary  Congress.  I.  4(i2,  463. 

Thomson,  GEORGE.  LETTER  TO  : 

30  June  1825,  III.  490. 
Thomson.  Hi:..  I.  421. 

Thomson.  Mi:.. ,  I.  412. 

Thornton,  Dr.  William,  II.  482.    IV. 

113. 

Thornton, ,  II.  197. 

Tnou.  James  A.  he.  His  history  of  his 

own  Times.  I.  145. 
THRDSTON,  BCCENER,  Assistant  Jidge 

of  Circuit  Court  of  I>.  C,  Letter  to  : 
1  March.  1833,  IV.  279. 

Uis  Latin  epitaph  embracing  the  co- 


G78 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


[TIIK  —  T  R  E 


incidences  in  the  lives  and  deaths  of 
J.  Adams  and  Jefferson,  IV.  279. 

Thruston, ,  I.  213,  216. 

Thcctdides,  IV.  467. 

Ticknor,  George,  Letters  to  : 
(i  April  L825,  III.  486 

2  May,  "         ••     488 

1  December,       "        "    506 
His   "Life    of   Gen.  Lafayette."   III. 
488.    His  •■  Remarks  concerning  Har- 
vard    University,"    506.      [See  III. 
229,230,231.] 

Tiffin.  Edward.  Grand  Sachem, 
Letter  to  : 
23  June,  1811,  II.  513. 

Tiffin,  Mr. .  III.  575. 

Tilghman,  William.  Chief  Justice  of 
Pennsylvania,  IV.  412.  [See  II.  81. 
84.] 

TiiTox.Dn..  II.  564. 

Timber  and  fin  wood,  Injurious  destruc- 
tion of,  111*.  93,  94. 

Time.  "  the  great  innovator."'  IV.  CO. 

Tir-im'-Sn.TAx  Behadocr.  I.  548 

Titles.  [See  "Adams,  John,"  "Lee. 
Richard  II.,"]  Condemnation  by  II. 
R.  of  titles  to  P.  and  V.  P.,  I.  467. 
Dissent  and  final  acquiescence  of  the 
Senate,  469,  471. 

Tobacco.  I.  92,  151,  156,  159.  330,  334. 
III.  82.  83.  130.  271.  IV.  145,  146. 
262,  278.  301.  Bill  of  II.  D.  of  Va. 
making  it  receivable  in  the  tax  at  the 
market  price.  I.  257,  201.  264,  265, 
267,  337.  537.  Planters  of  1\.  III. 
313.  Advice  to  them,  C27.  [See 
••  Crops,"  "  Prices."] 

Todd,  Thomas.  Associate  Justice  U.  S. 
S.  C.  III.  327,  487,  492. 

Toledo, ,  a  Mexican  insurgent, 

111.  99. 

"  Toleration:'  The  term  purposely  ex- 
cluded from  the  '•  Memorial  ami  Re- 
monstrance "  in  favor  of  Religious 
Liberty  and  from  the  Declaration  of 
rights,  111.  606. 

Tor»bi<jl>er.  III.  2. 

Tomkins,  Daniel  D..  Letters  to: 
25  January,       1814,  II.  580 
18  October.  "         "     590 

12  November.  "  "  593 
Declines  the  office  of  Secretary  of 
State.  II.  587,  590.  His  exertions  and 
services  during  the  war  of  1812. 
Vice  President  of  U.  S..  111.  17:'.. 
[See  II.  5)3,580.     III.  173.  174.] 

Tonnage.  III.  191.  On  British  vessels, 
I.  220.    Comparative  tonnage  of  U.  S. 


and    G.   B..   IT.    219.      Tonnage   and 
oilier  navigation  duties,  IV.  a:',. 
Tooke,  Andrew,  His  "Pantheon,"  HI 

2(15. 

Tohrey,  Dr., ,  III.  133. 

Toulmin,  Judge,  Letter  to  : 
:;  September,  1810,  II.  482. 

Tut/in,,.  Burning,  by  the  British,  of 
French  ships  there,  II.  II. 

TODSSAHD,  Col..  .  II.  217.  218. 

ToWNSEND,  Mi:.. .  II.  212. 

Townsend. .  Letter  to: 

is  October,  1831,  IV.  198. 

Townships,  1.  318,  &c. 

Tract,  a..  Ac.  Desti'tt  de,  IV.  320. 

Trade.  [See  "Commerce,"  "Commer- 
cial Propositions,"  "Great  Brit- 
ain," ••  Prices,"  "  Tariff,"  "  West 
Indies,"  Ac]  The  term  ased,  both 
in  books  and  in  conversation,  as  sy- 
nonymous with  "Commerce,"  IV. 
233.  Advantage  of  a  genera]  mart, 
I.  91  Ferfecl  freedom  of  trade  to  be 
attainable,  must  be  universal.  Ex- 
clusive policy  of  G.  Britain.  Neces- 
sity of  retaliating  Resolutions,  and 
of  harmony  in  the  measures  of  the 
Slates  to  effectuate  them.  170,  171. 
Internal  trade.  17  1.  Power  of  regu- 
lating trade  ought  to  be  a  Federal 
power.  169,  170,  196,  197.  Vote  on 
the  subject.  200.  203.  Distresses  of 
trade.  200.  Notes  of  Madison's 
speech,  in  1785,  on  the  question  of 
vesting  in  Congress  the  general  pow- 
er of  regulating  commerce  for  all  the 
Slates.  201,  202.  Idea  of  Commiss- 
ioners to  Annapolis  from  the  Slates, 
for  deliberating  on  the  state  of  com- 
merce and  the  decree  of  power  which 
ought  to  be  lodged  in  Congress,  208, 
216,  217.  Danger  from  separate  reg- 
ulations by  the  States,  220.  Balance 
of  trade  227.  The  regulation  of  it 
should  be  a  power  of  the  National 
Government,  288.  Mediterranean 
Trade,  II  174.  Colonial  Trade.  190, 
213.  33i;.  et  seq.  III.  103.  ill,  112, 
180,  281,  284,  627.  628,  649,  050. 
West  India  Trad.'.  128,  284,  297,  55:;. 
IV.  13.  Forbidden  trade  with  and 
through  Canada.  III.  566.  [See  I. 
L56,  15s,  330.  II.  32,  4  29.  430.  431. 
III.  103.  112.  224.  584.] 

Treasury  Deposits,  II.  482. 

Treasury.  Letter  to  the  acting  Sec' 

RETART  OF  THE,    : 

16  September.  1813,  III.  389. 


T  R  I  ] 


GENERAL     INDEX. 


679 


Tbeasi  by,  Letter  to  tiik  Secretary 

OF    THE  : 

3  June,  1814,  IH.  403. 

Treasury  Notes,  HI.  18. 

Treaties.  [See  "  Constitution  ofU. 
S.."  "France,"  "Great  Britain," 
•■  Jay,  John.''  ■•  Sovereignty,"  &c.] 
Treaties  made  by  the  States,  IV.  303. 
Treaty  of  peace  with  G.  B.,  (1783), 
IV.  4.J3  —  47o.  Report  of  the  Sec- 
retary of  Foreign  affairs  on  infrac- 
tions <>i'  it.  1.  270.  Address  to 
the  States,  concerning  it,  290.  Act 
of  Congress,  317.  Violations,  on  our 
part,  of  tin-  Treaty,  317,  318  Legal 
character  of  the  stipulation  in  ii  con- 
cerning the  recovery  of  debts.  523  — 
I  \\  303.     I  reaty  of  December, 

1800,     negotiated     by     Monroe     mid 

Pinckney  with  British  Commission- 
ers, li.  iu">.  406,  422.  Error  as  to  the 
cause  <»['  iis  rejection,  407.  Treaty  of 
Ghent  (1814)  J II.  288.  Treaty  of 
lTT.s  with  France,  I.  578.  II.  101. 
Treaty  with  Spain.  [See  "  Spain."] 
Treatj  with  Algiers,  85,  86,  95.  [See 
"Algiers."]  Indian  Treaties,  95. 
III.  413.  Treaty  in  1650  between  the 
United  Provinces  and  Spain,  If.  264, 
267.  Pyrenean  Treaty  in  1659  be- 
tween Fiance  and  Spain.  265.  Treaty 
in  1661  between  LL  Provinces  and 
Portugal,  265.  Treaty  in  1662  be- 
tween France  and  the  U.  Provinces, 
200.  Treaty  in  1672  between  France 
and  Sweden,  267.  Treaty  in  1075  be- 
tween Sweden  and  U.  Provinces,  207. 
Treaty  in  1078  between  France  and 
U.  Provinces.  267.  Treaty  in  1679 
between  Sweden   and   U.  Provinces, 

207.  Treaty  in  1679  between  France 
and  E.  Provinces,  267.  Treaty  in 
17(il  between  Denmark  and  I'.  Prov- 
inces. 207.  Treaty  in  1710  between 
France  and  the  Hanse  Towns.  267. 
Treaty  in  172.J.  between  the  Emperor 
Charles  VI.,  and  Philip  V.  of  Spain, 
2(j7.  Treaty  ID  17.V2  between  Naples 
and  Holland.  207.  Treaty  in  1707 
between  France  and  Hamburg,  268. 
Treaty  in  1707  between  France  and 
Duke  of  Mecklenburg,  208.  Treaty  in 
1654   between    England    and    Spain, 

208.  Treaty  in  1001  between  Eng- 
land and  Sweden,  209.  Treaty  in 
1007  between  England  and  Spain, 
269.  Treaties  1667,  - '8,  between 
England  and  U.  Provinces.  269.  Tri- 
ple League  of  1008,  209.     Treaties  in 


1669,  1670,  between  England  and 
Denmark,  269,  270.  Treaty  in  1074 
beta een  England  and   !'.  Provinces, 

270.     Treaty    in    1077    between    Eng- 

land  and  France,  27:;.  Treaty  in 
1713    between    Great     Britain    and 

France.  274.  Treaties  of  Utrecht  in 
L713,  276.  III.  463.  Treaty  in  1720 
between  G.  P>.  and  Sweden,  II.  277. 
Treaty  in  1721  between  <;.  B.  and 
Spain',  277.  Treaty  in  172'.)  of  G.  B. 
with  France  and  Spain.  277.  Treaty 
of  1731  of  G.  IJ.  with  Emperor  of 
Germany  and    United    Netherlands, 

277.  Treaty  in  1734  between  G.  B. 
and  Russia,  277.  Convention  in  173'.) 
between  G.  B.  and  Spain.  277.  Trea- 
ty in  174:;  at  Aix-la-Chapelle  between 
G.  B.,  France  and  the  U.  Provinces, 
acceded  to  by  other  powers.  277.  III. 
403.  Treaty  in  1703  between  G.  B., 
France  and  Spain,  acceded  to  by 
Portugal,  II.  278.  Ill  163.  IV.  441, 
445.  Treaty  in  1700  between  G.  B. 
and  Russia,  II.  278.  Convention  in 
1780    betweeu   G.  13.    and    Denmark, 

278.  Treaty  of  peace  in  1783  be- 
tween G.  B.  and  Fiance.  278.  Treaty 
in  1783  between  G.  B.  and  Spain. 
278.  Treaty  of  commerce  in  1780 
between  G.  B.  and  France.  27s.  586. 
IV.  282.  Convention  in  1787  be- 
tween G.  B.  and  France,  279.  Nego- 
tiations at  Lisle  in  1797  between  G. 
B.  and  France,  279.  Treaty  in  1801, 
between  G.  B.  and  Russia,  279. 
Treaties  formed  by  the  Government 
are  treaties  of  the  nation  unless  oth- 
erwise expressed  in  the  Treaties.  634. 
Treaties  not  affected  by  a  change  of 
Government,  634.  Treaty  making 
power.  III.  515.  [See  II.  200  —  264, 
586.     III.  268.     IV.  370.] 

Tremble,  Col..  ,  III.  f>36. 

•'Tree  of  useful  Knowledge  planted 
in  every  neighborhood  would  help  to 
make  a  paradise,  as  that  of  forbidden 
use  occasioned  the  loss  of  one/'  III. 
259. 

Trees,  I.  363. 

Triangular  war  of  U.  S.  with  G.  B.  and 
France,  II.  535. 

Tribunes,  Roman,  I.  397. 

Trident.  Its  probable  transfer  frotr 
the  Eastern  to  the  Western  hem  is- 
isphere,  III.  236,  239,  507.  IV.  361 
434. 

Tripoli,  "War  with,  in  1801,  etc.,  III 
000. 


680 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[TBI  —  U  X  I 


Trtst,  Nicholas  P.,  LETTERS  to  : 

6  July,  1826,  III.  625 

7  February,   1827,    "    551 

2  March,  "        "    565 
April,             "         "     575 

12  June,  "        "     584 

24  December,     "         "     605 

26  January,      1828,     "     614 
23  April,  "        "     629 

1  March,  1829,   IV.     16 

February,   1830,     "       58 

15  February,      "        "       61 

3  June,  "  "  87 
23  September,     "         "     110 

5  May,  1831,     •'     179 
December,     "        "     204 

21  December,     "        "     212 
May,  1832,     "     217 

29  May,  '•        "     218 

4  December,  "  "  227 
23  December,  "  "  228 
18  January,     1833,    "     267 

25  August,        1834,     "     354 

His  able  view  of  the  Virginia  docu- 
ments of  1798  -  '99,  IV.  58.  A 
work  proposed  by  him,  IV.  227.  [See 
III.  544.     IV.  20,  40,  411.  n.] 

Trist,  Mr.,  II.  158.     His  death,  210. 

Trist,  Mrs.,  I.  100,  107,  198. 

Trumbull,  John.  Letter  to  : 
1  March,  1835,  IV.  376. 
His  prints,  II.  1.37. 

Truxton.  Capt.  Thomas,  II.  400. 

Tucker,  George,  Letters  to  : 
20  July,  1829,    IV.     42 

30  April,  1830,     "       70 
17  October,      1831,     "     198 

6  July.  1833,     "     303 

27  June,  1836,    "     435 

His  "  Life  of  Jefferson,"  IV.  435. 
[See  III.  545.] 

Tucker,  Henry  St.  George, 
Letter  to  : 
23  December,  1817,  III.  53. 

Tucker,  St.  George.  A  pamphlet  as- 
cribed to  him,  1.  201.  A  Commissioner 
to  Annapolis,  216,  217.  Sensible. 
Federal,  and  skilled  in  commerce, 
223.  A  Judge  of  the  District  Court 
of  Va.,  378.     [See  III.  5  IS.] 

Tucker,  Thomas  T.,  Extract  from  his 
speech  in  the  first  Congress,  IV.  245, 
246.      [See  II.  1!).] 

Tucker,   Dr.,   ,   I.   452,      II.  172. 

III.  19. 

Tudor,  William.  III.  242. 

Tull,  Jetro,  His  Essay  on  Domestic 
economy,  &c.,  III.  81,  88,  106,  107. 


TURBERVILI.K.  GrFOROE  L.,  LETTER  TO  : 

2  November,  1788,  I.  433. 
[See  I.  421.] 

Ti  root,  A.  U.  J.,  II.  457. 

Turkey,  III.  235.  IV  479.  Com- 
pound and  horrible  depotism  at  Con- 
Btantinople,  III.  238. 

Turner,  Sir  William.  II.  320. 

Turreau.  Gen.  Loirs  M.,  Letter  to  : 
4  April,  180.3.  II.  211. 
Minister   from   France   to  U.  S.,   II. 
426.  440.     His   offensive  letter  to  R. 
Smith,  Secretary  of  State,  571. 

Tyler,  John,  Letter  to  : 

3  November,  1804,  II.  207. 
Appointed  to  Court  of  Admiralty,  I. 
221.  [See  p.  266.]  I  lis  machinations, 
149.  Ili^  contest  for  the  Speaker's 
chair.  212.  Offers  to  the  II.  of  D.  of 
Virginia  a  proposition,  [prepared  by 
Madison.]  inviting  the  oilier  Mates  to 
concur  with  Virginia  in  a  Convention 
of  deputies  commissioned  to  devise 
and  report  a  uniform  system  of  com- 
mercial regulations,  HI.  587.  [See  I. 
217,  222,  387.] 

Tyler,  John.  (2nd.)  Letters  to  : 

4  August,  1826,  HI.  526 

1833, IV.  280 
His  Oration  on  the  death  of  Jefferson, 
III.  526.  Governor  of  Virginia, 
(1825  -  '27.)  His  Message.  IV.  48. 
His  pamphlet,  303.  [See  TV.  304.] 
His  speech  in  Senate  of  U.  S.  6  Feb- 
ruary 1833,  on  the  Revenue  Collec- 
tion Bill.  IV.  280. 

Ti/phus  fever.  III.  188,  202,  225,  236, 
237,  241. 


U. 


Ulloa,  Antonio  di.  nis  "  Voyage  to  S. 

America."    "  Noticias    Americanas," 

&c,  1.146. 
••  Ultima  Batvo,"  IV.  101,  &c. 

Union.  [See  "  Compact."  "  Constitu- 
tion of  IT.  S.,"  "  Disunion,"  "Nulli- 
fication," "  Secession."  "  South  Car- 
olina." ••  Sovereignty,"  '"States  op 
the  Union."  '  United  States.''  etc., 
etc.]  Projected  Union  at  Albany, 
in  17.34.  III.  10.3.  A  maxim  that  the 
Union  of  the  States  is  essential  to 
their  safety  against  foreign  danger 
and  internal  contention,  and  that  the 
perpetuity  and  efficacy  of  the  present 
[1781]  system  cannot  be  confided  in, 


r  \  i  ] 


GENERAL     INDEX, 


G81 


T.  110.  Gloom;  prospeol  of  preserv- 
ing the  Union  of  tin-  States,  229,  230. 
A  partition  inti>  three  more  practica- 
ble ami  energetic  <  rovernments,  a  less 
evil  than  the"  existing  system  [Confed- 
eration] init  a  greal  evil,  280.  Unan- 
imous wish  of  the  Convention  of  17^7 
■•  to  cherish  and  preserve  the  Union 
of  the  States.  No  proposition  was 
made,  no  suggestion  was  thrown  out, 
in  favor  of  a  partition  of  the  Empire 
into  two  or  more  Confederacies,"  :il  I. 
'•  The  Union  :  who  auk  its  real 
friknds?"  [V.  480,  481.  lis  vital  im- 
portance, 11.  4;'.ii.  ••Tlic  worst  nf  all 
political  divisions  an-  founded  on  <  ;<• 
ograpbical  boundaries,"  &c,  III.  142, 
157,  104.  Peep  interest  of  every 
pari  of  the  U.  in  maintaining  it.  17.">. 

It  '*  ALONE  BECURES"  TO  THE  STATES 
l,THEIB  PEACE,  THEHt  BAFETT,  AND 
THEIR  PROSPERITY,"  III.  646.      IV.  218. 

A  wonder  in  the  eyes  of  the  world, 
54,  55.  Tendencies  to  weaken  it.  298. 
Rapid  growth  of  the  individual 
States.  298.  Absence  ami  oblivion 
of  external  danger,  298.  Inculca- 
tions (it  an  incompatibility  of  inter- 
ests i.i  different  sections,  ami  aii  op- 
pression mi  tlic  minor  by  (lie  major 
section.  298,  330,  568.  Contagious 
zeal  in  vindicating  and  varnishing  I  lie 
doctrine-  of  Nullification  ami  Seces 
sion,  568.  Counter  tendencies :  Geo- 
graphical and  commercial  relations 
among  the  States, 298,37 3.  Gradual  di- 
minution of  conflicting  interest,-,  be- 
tween the  greal  sections  of  country  by  a 
surplus  of  labor  in  the  agricultural  sec- 
tion, assimilating  it  to  the  manufac- 
turing section,  '21)8.  Or  by  such  a  suc- 
cess of  the  manufacturing  section, 
without  obnoxious  aids,  as  will  sub- 
stitute for  the  foreign  supplies  which 
have  caused  discords,  internal  inter- 
changes beneficial  to  every  section, 
208.  Obvious  consequences  of  Dis- 
union, by  which  the  value  of  the  Uni- 
on is  to  be  calculated,  298.  Increas- 
ing self  confidence  of  members  of 
the  Union  :  decreasing  influence  of 
apprehensions  from  without  :  ami  as 
pirations  for  new  theatres,  multiply- 
ing the  chances  of  elevation  in  the 
lottery  of  political  life,  may  require 
the  co-operation  of  whatever  moral 
causes  may  aid  in  preserving  the 
equilibrium  contemplated  by  the 
iheory  of  the  compound  Government 


of  U.    S.,   208.     Appeals   to    the    love 

and  pride  of  country.  298.  Proposed 
exhibition  of  a  picture  of  the  magi- 
cal effect  of  the  national  emblem  in 
converting  the  fury  of   the  Boldiery 

into  enthusiasm  for  the  i\c<-  ami  unit- 
ed People  whom  it  represented,  298. 
Origin  in  s.  Carolina.  Suggestion  of 
consigning  the  original  painting  to  a 
national  depository,  200.  Answer  of 
experience  to  arguments  founded  on 
the  extent  of  the  Union,  &c.  Territ- 
ories, '■>'-*.  Effect  of  canals,  steam- 
boats, turnpikes  and  railroads,  in  the 
virtual  approximation  of  the  most 
distant  parts  of  the  Union,  328. 
Hasty  observers  ami  unfriendly  pro- 
phetS  have  regarded  the  Union  as  too 
frail  to  last,  and  to  be  split  at  no  dis- 
tant day  into  the  two  great  divisions 
of  East  and  West.  :;t:;.  Considera- 
tions against  this  prophecy,  373.  Un- 
certainty as  to  the  final  operation  of 
the  disturbing  causes,  430.  Favora- 
ble considerations.  430.  Expected 
opposition  of  the  lour  great,  religious 
sects,  running  through  all  the  States 
to  an  event  placing  parts  of  each 
under  separate  Governments,  4oU. 
Phenomena  of  ill  omen.  Consolato- 
ry reflection.  431.  Tin:  Union  ok  THE 
States  [to]  be  cherished  and  peri'et- 

CATED,  437.  [See  111.  10.3.  IV.  101.] 
Union  bvtween  England  and  Scotland. 
Points  in  its  history,  I.  380  —  301. 
United  Netherlands,  I.  347. 
United  States.  [See  '•  Constitution 
of  U.  S.,"  "France," '-Gueat  Brit- 
ain," "History,"  "Parties,"  "  Pop- 
ulation," "  Union."  Ac.  &C.]  Delay 
in  the  ratification  of  peace,  1.  G8,(i9. 
Number  of  States  necessary  to  make 
a  Treaty  of  peace,  GO,  70,  71.  Ques- 
tion as  to  the  competency  of  Seven 
Stales  to  revoke  a  commission  for  a 
Treaty  issued  by  Nine  States,  71.  72. 
Sense  of  the  the  term  "  appropria- 
tion." 72.  Authority  of  the  Federal 
Court,  72.  Address  to  the  States 
by  the  United  States  in  Congress 
ASSEMBLED,  IV.  448  —  453.  In  1791 
nearly  three  millions  of  the  People 
of  the  U.  S.  were  of  British,  includ- 
ing Irish,  descent.  456.  British  im- 
ports into  U.  S.  in  1701.  45(i.  Consid 
orations  for  them  arising  out  of  Napo- 
leon's return  from  Elba.  II.  610,  (ill. 
Proposed  Legislative  history  of  U.  S., 
III.  59.     Their  peculiar   advantages 


G82 


G  E  XERAL    INDEX 


[l.\'l  —  U  T  0 


as  to  climate,  soil,  political  and  soci- 
al institutions,  III.  7(1.  Growing  re- 
spect for  U.  S.  among  the  great  Pow 
ers  of  Europe,  112.  Their  conduct 
and  duty  respecting  the  Revolutiona- 
ry struggle  in  South  America,  118, 
354.  Probability  of  their  future 
Naval  ascendency,  236,  239, 507.  IV. 
301,  434.  Their  condition  in  1820, 
III.  190.  In  1821,  240.  In  1822.  265. 
In  1823,  330,  331,  332.  Their  recog- 
nition of  S.  American  independence, 
207.  Their  example  of  Republican- 
ism and  religious  liberty,  270.  Their 
efforts  called  for  to  defeat  the  medi- 
tated crusade  of  the  Holy  Alliance 
against  the  Revolutionized  colonies 
of  Spain,  339.  Suggested  co-opera- 
tion with  G.  B.  respecting  the  medita- 
ted crusade  of  the  Holy  Alliance 
against  the  Revolutionized  colonies 
of  Spain,  the  French  invasion  of 
Spain,  and  the  Greeks,  339.  340,  341. 

345,  346,  351,  352.  Claim  of  U.  S.  to 
the  navigation  of  the  St.  Lawrence 
through  British  Territory,  and  to 
the  navigation  of  the  Missis- 
sippi    through     Spanish     Territory, 

346.  Principles  of  natural  right  arid 
public  law  applicable  to  the  claim, 
346,  347.  Early  marriages  in  U.  S., 
349.  Increase  of  population,  349. 
Idea  of  their  being  invited  to  a  Euro- 
pean Congress,  354.  A  remarkable 
feature  of  their  political  system  is 
its  annihilation  of  a  power  inherent 
in  some  branch  of  all  other  Govern 
ments,  that,  of  taxing  exports,  436. 
Are  furnishing  models  and  lessons  to 
all  the  world,  473.  Their  advantages, 
compared  with  those  of  G.  B.,  as  to 
navigation  and  commerce.  566,  567. 
Their  prosperity  in  1827,  602.  Geo- 
graphical relations  enforcing  their 
many  obligations  to  cherish  the 
"Union.''  646,  047.  Their  precious 
advantage  in  the  actual  distribution 
of  property,  particularly  the  landed 
property,  and  in  the  universal  hope 
of  acquiring  property,  IV.  23,  24. 
Outline  of  their  political  system. 
73  —  76,  138,  139.  Considerations 
respecting  subscriptions  by  them  to 
the  stock  of  private  companies,  92. 
To  be  a  manufacturing  as  well  as  an 
agricultural  country.  &c.,  205.  Then- 
controversy  with  Prance.  420.  Their 
free  and  republican  institutions  char- 
acterized, 1st.,  by  a  division  of  the 


powers  of  Government  between  the 
Slates  in  their  united  and  in  their  in- 
dividual capacities.  2nd..  By  defined 
relations  between  the  several  depart- 
ments and  branches  of  the  Govern- 
ment, 388,  389.  Their  arms  though 
invincible  in  defence  are  little  for- 
midable in  a  war  of  offenee,  492. 
[See  11.586,587.     III.  179,  264,  309.] 

••  Universal  Peace,"  IV.  470  —  172. 
University,  A  National,  III.  49.  Consid- 
erations respecting  Theological  pro- 
fessorships in  a,  306,  307.  Within  the 
District  of  Columbia,  631. 
University  of  Virginia.  [See  "  Jeffer- 
son,  Thomas,*']  "The  Academic 
village,  as  it  might  be  called,"  III. 
265.  Central  Institution.  (University  >, 
49,  50,  110,  115,  116,  118,  126,  139, 
205,  285,  290,  291,  292,  300.  307, 
Svstem  of  polity  for  it  in  prep- 
aration. III.  474.  475.  470.  189,547, 
550.  The  Law  Professorship,  516. 
Text  books  for  the  Law  school.  48], 
482,  483.  IV.  308.  Chair  of  Natural 
Philosophy,  III.  484.  485.  Opening 
prospects  of  the  U.,  486.  Ilardheart- 
edness  of  the  Legislature  toward  it, 
517.  ''A  temple  dedicated  to  science 
and  liberty."  533.  Under  State  en- 
dowment, 597.  [See  III.  308.  332, 
343,  344.  353,  360,  368,  433.  437,  438, 
440,  447,  448,  450.  476,  477.  478,  544, 
545.  551,  570,  596.  604,  613,  614,  621, 
660.  TV.  9,  35,  82,  83,  86,  109,  179 
197.  198,  308,  342.] 

Upshur,  Abel  P.  IV.  414. 

Urbanna,  I.  488. 

Usurpation.  [See  "  Constitution  of 
U.S.'']  IV.  19,  119.  Efficacy  of  a 
watchful  standing  corps  in  dividing 
adversaries.  II.  14.  The  abuse  and  the 
usurpation  of  power,  IV.  238,  255. 

Utica,  III.  389. 

Utopia,  IV.  332. 

Utrecht  Treaty  of,  in  1713.  IT.  276. 
586.     III.  463,  468,  469. 

V. 
Vail,  Aaron,  Letter  to  : 

3  February,  1834.  IV.  568. 
Fa'e(7'c/on/.[SeeaFAitEWEi.T.ApnrfEss."J 
Van  Bcren,  Martin,  Letters  to  : 

27  March,  1820.  III.  17:; 

28  April.  1826,  "  523 
20  September,  "  "  528 
15  October,  "  "  530 
13  March.             1827,    "     509 

21  February,      1828,    "     622 


V     AN  —  VIR] 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


683 


IS  May,  1828,  T I  r.  634 

3  June,  1830,1V.     88 

5  July,  "       "       89 

9  October,  "       "     116 

18  February,  1835,  "  376 
His  observations  on  the  depending 
modification  of  the  Federal  Courts, 
I  v.  523.  His  [  ?  ]  Report  to  the  Sen- 
ate on  the  "Georgia  business,"  569. 
His  speech  on  behalf  of  the  surviving 
officers  of  the  Revolutionary  army. 
622.  His  "  Observations  on  Mr. 
Foote*s  Amendment,"  111.  634     [See 

III.  513,  634.     IV.  17!).] 

V.v\  Helmont,  .III  81. 

VanPolaren,   .Letter  to: 

13  August  1,802,  II.  177. 
Van  Rennselaer, ,  II.  35. 

Van  Staphobst, ,  II.  13,  89,  145. 

Van  Whit, ,  III.  140. 

Vansittart,  Nicholas,  English  Chan- 
cellor of  the  Exchequer,  III.  558, 
559. 

Varnum,  Joseph  B.,  IT.  35.  99,  101. 

Vattel,  Emmerich,  &c.,  His  "  Law  of 
Nations. "•  I.  129,  578,  614,  634,  651. 
II.    219  —  254.    309,  372.      III.    347. 

IV.  289,  446. 
Vadgkan,  John.  I.  333. 
Vadx,  Roberts,  Letter  to  : 

21  February.  1827,  III.  552. 
His   Discourse  before  the  Historical 
Society  of  Pennsylvania,  III.  552. 

Vegetables.  Proportion  between  the 
animal  and  vegetable  classes  of  be- 
ings. IH.  75,  198. 

Venezuela,  II.  521. 

Vergennes,  Charles  G.,  Count  de, 
French  Minister  of  Foreign  affairs,  I. 
102.     III.  464,  465. 

Vermont.  [See  "New  York."1  I. 
292,  473.  525.  528,  530.  II.  110,"  540, 
550.    III.  mi.] 

Verplanck,  Gdlian  C.  Letter  to  : 

14  February,  1828,  III.  617. 

Veto.  Distinction  between  an  abso- 
lute ami  a  qualified  veto,  IV.  139, 
140.  Distracting  and  dilatory  opera- 
tion of  a  veto  in  the  Senate  on  the 
removal  from  office,  368.  The  quali- 
Ded  Veto  of  the  President  is  not  lim- 
ited to  Constitutional  objections.  Ex- 
pected to  be  a  valuable  provision,  as 
a  shield  to  the  Executive  Depart- 
ment, against  Legislative  encroach- 
ments, and  a  general  barrier  to  the 
Constitution  against  them.  But.  a 
primary  object  of  the  prerogative 
was  that  of  a  check  to  the  instability 


<>f  legislation.  Lessons  of  experi- 
ence on  this  subject,  369.  [See  IV. 
208.] 

Vice  Presidency  of  U.  S.  Persons 
talked  of  for  the  office  at  the  outset 
of  the  Federal  Government,  I.  421, 
•122.  437  ;  and  at  the  second  election, 
572. 

Victoria,  Princess,  Autographic  spec- 
imen for  her.  IV.  508. 

Villeins,  IV.  53. 

Vine,  Culture  of  the,  III.  170,  205,  2G3. 

Virginia.  [See  ••  Fayette,"  "  Jeffer- 
son, Thomas/'  ••  KENTUCKY,"  "  M.viu- 
bon,  James,"  "  Religious  Assess- 
ment," '•  Representation,"  "Revised 
Code  op  Virginia,"  "Universitt  of 
Virginia,"  '■  Virginia  Resolutions.'' 
Ac] 
Letter  to  tiie  General  Assembly 

of  Virginia  : 
1  March,  1817,  IV.  557. 
Opinions  there  concerning  Religious 
liberty,  I.  14.  Sympathy  with  the 
people  of  Boston,  16.  Declaration 
of  rights  in  1776,  report  of,  21.  Plan 
of  Government  for,  1776,  24.  The 
boundary  [  Qu.  ?]  controversy,  43. 
Importance  of  preserving  the  idea  of 
unity  in  the  State.  53.  Seizure  of 
her  property  by  Mr.  Nathan.  54,  55. 
Infancy  of  her  commercial  genius,  73. 
The  Council  a  grave  of  useful  talents, 
73*  Possible  effect  of  the  language 
of  the  Constitution  on  a  question  of 
river  jurisdiction,  74.  Proceedings 
of  the  Legislature,  81,  82.  Refusal 
to  remunerate  T.  Paine,  85.  86.  Pro- 
vision towards  complying  with  a  re- 
quisition of  Congress,  86,  87.  Act 
taxing  law  proceedings,  &c,  basis  of 
a  Stamp  Act:  Port  Bill:  Brit- 
ish debts  :  State  Convention  :  General 
Assessment :  Lands  at  Richmond  and 
Williamsburg  :  Lottery  for  encour- 
agement of  a  school  :  Revisal  of  the 
laws  :  Appointment  of  four  Commis- 
sioners, to  negotiate  with  Maryland 
to  establish  regulations  for  the  Poto- 
mac. 87  —  89.  Public  dislike  of  the 
Legislative  footing  on  which  British 
debts  are  placed.  90,  Beneficial  ef- 
fects of  Independence  on  the  prices  of 
staples,  92.  Scheme  for  a  general  as 
sessment,  109.  Bill  for  a  religion? 
assessment,  111,  113,  154.  Bill  foi 
confirming  surveys  against  subse 
quent  entries.  112.  Bill  for  establish 
ing  Circuit  Courts,  112,  113.     Propo 


684 


GENERAL    INDEX. 


[VIB-TIR 


sition  concerning  4th  Art.  of  Treaty  of 
peace,  (Reciprocal  recovery  of  debts.) 
113.  Revisalof  her  laws, 114;  134,176. 
199.     Grounds  of  rejection   of  a  pro- 
position to  empower  Congress  to  car- 
ry into  effect  the  imposts,  as  soon  as 
12   States    should    make   themselves 
parties  to  it.    Rills  passed  concerning 
surrender  of  fugitives,  (extending  to 
offences  against  the  Indians.)     Assize 
Courts  and  General  assessment,  115, 
118.    Assize   bill,    117  :   General   as- 
sessment   bill :      Episcopal     church. 
British  debts  :   Bills  for  opening  Po- 
tomac  and   James   Rivers,  117,  118. 
Her  dispositions  as  to  supplying  the 
defects   of    the    Confederation,    11!). 
Acts   for   river  surveys.    Resolution 
for  settling  with  Maryland  the  juris- 
diction of  the  Potomac  ;  and  joining 
in  a  representation  to  Pennsylvania 
concerning   the   waters   of  the  Ohio 
within  her  limits,  119,  120,  121,  122. 
Present  of  shares  in  the  Potomac  and 
James     River     Companies     to    Gen. 
Washington,    122.      Review  of   pro- 
ceedings of  the  General   Assembly, 
122—124,  140.     Counties  west  of  the 
Alleghany,  147,   148.    Elections  and 
new  members.  149.    British  monopo- 
ly of  trade  with,  15G,  158.     Port  bill, 
157,207.    Her  interest  to  part  with 
Kentucky,  and  to  refuse  to  part  with 
any  more  of  her  settlements  beyond 
the     Alleghany,     157.      Negotiation 
with  Pennsylvania.  160.     Remarks  on 
Jefferson's  draught  of  a  Constitution 
for    Va.,    185  —  195.      The     county 
Court  system,  bad,  180.      Its  recep- 
tion   by    the   Legislature,    199,    200. 
Public  credit.    Assize  bill.    Port  bill. 
Projected  canal  between  the  waters 
of  Virginia  and  North  Carolina,  207 
Proceedings  of  the  Legislature,   208 
—  211.    Compact  with  Maryland,  211. 
List  of  Acts  not  included  in  the  Re- 
visal,  214  —  221.      Bitter  and  illiber- 
al  opposition  of  certain  members  t6 
the  appointment  of  Commissioners  to 
Annapolis,  21G,  217.    Her  Act  against 
attempts  to  dismember  the  State,  21!). 
Her  Act  appropriating  her  quota  to 
the  Confederacy.  219,  223.     Adjourn- 
ment of  the  Legislature.      Numerous 
laws.  222.  223.     Navigation  system  of 
the  State  passed  over,  222.      Indispo- 
sition   of    the   Legislature  to  give  a 
plenipotentiary   commission   to   their 
delegates  to  Annapolis,  229.    Chang- 


es in  late  elections,  2.".2.  237.    Inter- 
nal   situation   of  the   State   growing 
worse   and  worse.     Want    of    specie. 
Debt.    Fall  of  tobacco,  233.    Zeal  of 
the  Legislature  for  the  navigation  of 
the  Mississippi,   251,   259,   260,   266, 
275.    Decisive  vote  in  II.  J),  against  a 
paper     emission.    252,    254.      Other 
hopeful  votes.  253.  260.      Delay.-    for 
want  of  a  Senate,  257.    Tobacco  bill, 
257.     Revised  Code.   260.     Bill  pro- 
portioning  crimes  and   punishments, 
200.     Education,    200.     Plan  of  Dis- 
trict Courts,  201,  2G4.  2G5.     Fruil 
impolitic  legislation  respecting  taxes, 
261.    Prospect  of  injudicious  legisla- 
tion,  2G4.    Subjects,   267,   268,  269. 
Page  for  high  duties.  271.     Legisla- 
tive  proceedings.    272  —  27(1.       The 
only  State  which  has  made  any  pro- 
vision for  the  late  requisition  of  Cong- 
ress. 278.   Danger  of  a  paper  emission 
in  Va.,   318,  332.      County  elections 
319.    Spirit  of  insurrection  in  Green 
briar  County,  336,  337.    Discontents 
339.     Reception  of   the  Constitution 
of  U.  S.,  and   opinions   respecting  it 
in  Virginia,   358,   359.  3G4,  3G5.  368. 
Disposition    of     prominent     citizens 
toward    the   new   Constitution.    3G4, 
365,    378.       Prohibitory   regulations, 
and  heavy  duties,  3GG.     Proceedings 
of    the    Legislature.    367,    368,    378. 
District   Court  bill.  378.     Pesolution 
concerning  British  debts,  379.     Con- 
jectures as  to  the  probable  fate  of  the 
new  Constitution  in  the  Virginia  Con- 
vention.  384.    Opinions   of   notable 
individuals,  387.     Difficulty  in  ascer- 
taining the  real  sense  of  the  People 
of    the    State    on    the    question,    3*8. 
Geographical  view  of  their  opinions, 
388.        Meeting    of    the    Convention. 
Proceedings  and  prospects,  398,  399, 
400.    Ratification,  401,  404.    Virginia 
proposes  twenty  amendments  to  Con- 
stitution of  P.  S.,  IV.  129.     Modera- 
tion and  decorum  of  members.  1.  4  04. 
Motives  for  alterations,  423.    Dills  of 
rights.     That  of  Virginia  violated   in 
instances  where   it    has  been  opposed 
to  a  popular  current.  424.    Questions 
of  Count  de  Moostier,  and  answers 
to  them.   430  —  433.     Her  products, 
Ac.  431.      The  only   instance  among 
the  ratifying  Slates  in  which  the  poli- 
tics of  the  Legislature  are  at  variance 
With  the  sense  of  the  People  e\j> 
ed   by  their  Representatives  in  Con- 


Tilt] 


GENERAL     INDEX 


085 


vention,  437.  Two  thirds  of  the  Leg- 
islature enemied  to  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, 112.  Effect  of  returns  of 
elections  to  Congress  from  the  West 
em  counties,  1 16.  Returns  from  two 
Districts  Cor  choosing  electors  of  P. 
ami  Vr.  P.,  449.  Names  oi  those  chos- 
en, 457.  Names  of  representatives 
elected  to  Congress,  458.  Letter  of 
her  Senators  in  Congress  to  the  Leg- 
islature, well  calculated  to  keep  alive 
the  disaffection  to  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment. 196.  497.  Proceedings  of 
the  Legislature.  Amendments  to  the 
Federal  Constitution.  497.  Lost,  501. 
Letter  of  her  Senators  transmitting 
amendments  agreed  on  by  Congress, 
499,  500.  .Memorable  proceedings 
dining  the  crisis  of  the  Stamp  Act, 
511.  518.  Caution  as  to  an  applica- 
tion to  the  Legislature;  concerning 
Slavery,  542.  Argument  in  the 
Federal  Court  at  Richmond  on 
the  great  question,  &c,  544. 
Elections  for  Congress,  576.  Sen 
timent  with  regard  to  liberty 
and  France,  582.  Heretical  tone 
of  conversation  in  the  towns  and  on 
the  Post  roads.  Suggestion  of  con- 
tributions of  the  necessaries  called 
for  by  the  danger  of  famine  in 
France,  582.  Sympathy  with  the 
French  Revolution,  583.  Resolutions 
to  be  proposed  at  county  meetings, 
599  —  GUI.  Meetings  at  Fredericks- 
burg, Culpeper,  Fauquier,  Richmond, 
605,  606.  Resolutions  prepared  by 
Madison,  II.  2.  Elections  in,  26, 
163,164.   Payment,  into  the  Treasury, 

81.  Amendments  proposed  by  V.  for 
requiring  consent  of  II.  R.  to  Treaties, 

82.  Amherst  memorial  on  Glebes 
and  Churches,  122.  Resolutions 
against  Alien  and  Sedition  laws,  and 
vindication  of  them,  151,  153.  Com- 
pensation of  members  of  the  Legisla- 
ture, 156.  Bill  for  drawing  Jurors 
by  lot,  156.  General  Ticket,  155, 
156.  157,  159.  '-The  wrong  ticket" 
in  Orange  county,  163.  Circular  from 
Directors  of  the  Literary  Fund,  III.  27. 
Defects  of  her  agriculture,  82,  &c, 
88.  89,  92  —  95.  improvement  of  the 
condition  of  slaves  in  V.  since  the 
Revolntion.  121,  122.  Caricatures  of 
the  moral  features  of  V..  122.  In- 
creased sensibility  to  human  rights, 
&c,  and    decreasing  proportion    of 


slaves     to     individual     holder-;,     122. 

Attempts  of  V.  during  the  Colonial 
Government  to  Btop  the  importation 
of  slaves.  L22.  Causes  tainting  the 
manners  ami  habits  of  tin;  People 
under  the  ( Jolonial  <  rOVernment,  122 
Scotch  merchants.  Intemperance, 
&c,  123.  '■  The  Ledger  inle 
123.  Septennial  elections  of  the  leg- 
islature, 123,  12  1.  increase  of  relig- 
ious instruction  since  the  Revolution, 
12  1.  Principal  religious  denomina- 
tions, 12  1.  Good  effects  ofthe,separ- 
tion  of  the  Church  from  the  State  on 
both,  125.  276.  Claim  of  V.  again-t 
D".  S.,  HI.  433.  Proceedings  of  the 
V.  Convention  of  1788  ••  well  sifted  " 
in  the  debates  on  the  Missouri  Ques- 
tion. 169.  Historians  of  Virginia 
205  532,  533.  Journals  of  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  for  1785.  225.  Litera- 
ry fund.  ^34.  Proposed  Gazetteer  of 
7a.,  ^72.  Bill  "  for  the  more,  general 
diffusion  of  knowledge,"  reported  to 
the  Legislature  in  1779,  by  Jefferson 
Pendleton  and  Wythe,  278.  Instruc- 
tions to  her  Delegates  to  Congress. 
5  May.  1776,  to  move  the  Declaration 
of  Independence,  282.  A  crisis  in 
her  Agriculture.  Proposition  for  a 
Professorship  of  A.  in  her  Univei>itv 
285.  College  of  William  and  Mary,308. 
Religious  liberty.  307,  308,  et  ante. 
Agriculture,  negroes,  slave  labor 
&c,  310—  315.  Free  Negroes.  315 
A  case  in  which  the  Governor  should 
make  a  neceessary  appointment,  and 
invoke  from  the  Legislature  a  valida- 
ting act,  319.  The  State  Constitution 
of  Va.  drawn  by  G.  Mason  ,  and  the 
Preamble  to  it  probablyderived  from 
Jefferson's  funds.  451,452,575,593, 
594.  "  Virginia  Resolutions,"  propo- 
sed in  Congress  in  1793  -  '4,  573 
Resolutions  of  1799.  481,  482,  483 
"  Revised  Code,"  (1785)  digested  and 
reported  by  Jefferson,  Wythe  and 
Pendleton,  501.  Considerations  on 
the  course  proper  to  be  pursued  by 
V.  on  the  power  exercised  by  Con- 
gress reepecting  Internal  improve- 
ments. 507—510,  511—514.  [Ste517. 
518.565.]  Deprecation  of  a  defying 
tone.  565.  Objections  to  the  expedi- 
ent of  enacting  statutes  of  Congress, 
into  Virginia  statutes,  513.  Bill  es- 
tablishing religious  freedom,  526 
Importance  of  a  republication  of  the 


686 


GENERAL     INDEX 


[  V  I  B 


Journals  of  both  Houses  of  the  Leg- 
islature. 548,  551.  Omissions  of  the 
Legislature  respecting  Jefferson,  570. 
Regretted  extreme  to  which  a  Reso- 
lution of  the  Legislature  goes,  in  de- 
claring the  Tariff  to  be  unconstitu- 
tional, 57  1.  Proposition  in  tlie  II.  of 
D.  January  2,  1786,  for  giving  Con- 
gress power  over  trade.  584.  585,  644. 
645.  Agency  of  Virginia  in  bringing 
about  the  Convention  of  1787,  586. 
587.  Journals  of  the  General  Assera 
bly  for  the  sessions  of  May.  177'.),  and 
1682,  588.  Fever  of  discontent  aba 
ting  in  1828,  619,  620.  Late  fervid 
proceedings  of  the  Legislature.  632, 
Duties  proposed  in  the  First  Congress 
by  members  from  Va.,  641,  6  12.  Her 
proceedings  occasioned  by  the  Alien 
and  Sedition  laws.  661.  '•  Frowns  on 
every  symptom  of  violence  and  disu 
nion."  602.  Talents,  integrity,  and 
false  prophecies  of  the  opponents  of 
the  Federal  Constitution  in  the  Va 
Convention  of  1788,  IV.  15.  In  th,' 
Federal  Convention  of  1787.  mem- 
bers from  Va.  proposed  that  the  pow- 
er of  encouraging  domestic  manufac- 
tures should  be  used  to  the  extent 
not  only  of  imposts,  but  prohibitions, 
15.  Ki.  Convention  for  revising  the 
State  Constitution.  (1829),  2,  13,  14, 
28.  36,  37.  38,  51  —  55,  57,  58,  60, 
222.  Prospect  of  the  adoption  of  tie' 
new  Constitution,  83.  Is  adopted.  !)  I. 
Excitement  in  the  North  Western 
counties  on  the  Ohio,  and  project  to 
annex  themselves  to  Maryland,  1  1(1. 
Duration  of  her  present  Constitution, 
and  hope  as  to  that  of  an  amended 
one,  3D.  A  copy  of  the  original  draft 
of  her  present  Constitution,  "now 
perhaps  a  solitary  relic,"  42.  Reso- 
lution of  Va.  at  the  session  of  1828  - 
'29,  Polemic  Resolutions,  44,  48. 
The  Declaration  of  Rights  in  1776, 
58.  Rival  jurisdiction  claimed  by 
the  Court  of  Appeals,  45,  46.  Differ- 
ence between  her  doctrine  in  '98-'99, 
and  the  present  doctrine  in  S.  Caroli- 
na, 44,  Proceedings  of  Va,  in  1798- 
'99,45.228;  Her  doctrine.  46.  Mis- 
constructions of  them,  (il.  72,  80,  84, 
142.  "With  one  voice  disclaims  the 
right  in  a  single  State  to  nullify  an 
Act  of  the  U.  States.  204.  Depreca- 
cation  of  an  assumption  by  the  Leg- 
islature of  the  high  character  of  Me- 
diators between  the  Federal  Govern- 


ment and  S.  Carolina.  229.  In  the 
First  Congress  propositions  made  by 
three  of  her  members: — by  one  for 
a  duty  on  coals  in  favor  of  her  coul 
pits  ;  by  another  for  a  duty  on  hemp, 
to  encourage  the  growth  of  the  arti- 
cle ;  and  by  a  third  for  the  prohibi- 
tion of  beef  in  favor  of  American 
graziers,  247.  Decrease  in  value  of 
her  lands,  and  ill  the  price  of  her  ex- 
ports ;  arising  from  the  Western  at- 
traction of  population  and  the  rival- 
ship  of  Western  exports,  262,  278. 
Greater  productiveness  of  capital  in 
the  Northern  States  than  in  Va. 
Proper  character  of  Legislative  Res- 
olutions respecting  Constitution  of 
U.  S.,  271.  Proper  course  for  the 
members  of  Congress  from  Virginia 
to  pursue  respecting  the  Tariff.  1^71 
Cautions  in  reducing  or  modifying 
the  Tariff  laws.  271.  Appearance  of 
yielding  to  threatened  consequences 
of  not  doing  what  is  required  by  the 
discontented  any  where,  to  be  avoid- 
ed, 270.  No  course  should  be  taken 
that  would  pledge.  Arc.,  Virginia  to 
take  side  with  S.  Carolina  or  any 
other  State,  in  resisting  the  laws  of 
U.  S.,  unless  causes  should  arise  of 
which  Virginia  should  be  free  to 
judge,  justifying  and  requiring  her  to 
do  so  ;  and  particularly  without  any 
commitment  of  her  to  view  in  that 
light  laws  of  U.  S.  now  existing,  271, 
272.  A  trap,  with  an  anti-tariff  bait 
in  it.  27,'.  273.  Contingent  conse- 
qnences  of  her  interposition  respect- 
ing the  nullifying  proceedings  of  S. 
Carolina.  273.  Previous  to  the  Revo- 
lution, the  face  of  Virginia  was,  in 
every  feature  of  improvement  and 
prosperity,  a  contrast  to  the  Colonies 
where  Slavery  did  not  exist,  278. 
The  great  and  adequate  cause  of  her 
present  depression  is  the  rapid  settle- 
ment of  the  Western  and  Southwest- 
ern country.  278.  Its  effect  on  the 
value  of  her  lands,  and  on  that  of  her 
staple  products. 278.  Successful  prog- 
ress in  the  plan  of  connecting  the  West, 
and  the  East  by  a  route  through  Virgin- 
ia, 21)7.  Probability  that  the  greater 
part  of  ber  40  or  50  thousand  labor- 
ers on  tobacco  will  be  released,  ic, 
and  be  applicable  to  employment 
in  manufactures.  300.  A  geological 
survey  of  the  State  BUggested  '.'>-'>. 
Diversity    of   agricultural    interests, 


TIB     —  T  I  R  ] 


GENERAL     INDEX, 


G87 


and  of  interests,  real  or  supposed,  re- 
specting roads  and  water  communica- 
tions, 330.  The  Slavery  question  in 
the  Eastern  and  Western  district-  of 
the  State,  330.  Uniformity  and  tena 
city  of  of  thti  decisions  respecting  it 
in  her  Convention  of  1829  -  '30,  and 
her  Legislature  in  1830  '31,  330. 
Must  Boon  become  manufacturing  as 
well  as  agricultural,  331,  '■'>'■>-.  Party 
spirit  in  1sl;i.  3  it.  Figure  now  made 
in  Virginia  by  the  anarchical  princi- 
ple, in  contrast  with  the  Bcouting  re- 
ception given  ti>  it.  but  a  short  time 
ago,  357.  Virginia  proposed  in  1786, 
the  Convention    at   Annapolis,  which 

recommended  the  Convention  at  Phil- 
adelphia, of  1787  ;  and  was  the  first 
of  the  States  thai  acted  on,  -and  com- 
plied with,  the  recommendation  from 
Annapolis,  880.  Her  constancy  to 
the  great  and  fundamental  principles 
of  republicanism,  390.  Total  loss  of 
.-nine  of  her  Legislative  Journals, 
432,  433.  Her  Revised  ('ode  of  laws, 
of  17  .  433.  [See  I.  356,  357,  361, 
488,  509,  511,  515.  II.  67.  76,  78, 
156,  162.  J II.  207,  208,  214,  271. 
307,  346,  428,  491,  573,  614,  627, 
640.  641.  IV.  13,  22,  43,  61.  L96, 
235,  236,  243,  251,  255,  405,  417,  432, 
433.] 
Virginia  Resolutions,  &c. 

Resolutions  of  the  General  Assembly 
of  Virginia,  concerning  {he  ■'  Alien  and 
bedition  Acts  "  of  Congress,  24  Decem- 
ber. 1798,  IV.  506, 507  : 

Resolutions,  die,  &c,  10  January 
1799.  50.S  : 

Address  of  the  General  Assembly  to 
the  People  of  the  Commonweatlk  of 
Virginia*  509  —  514  : 

Report  on  the  Virginia  Resolutions, 
to  the  House  of  Delegates,  Session  of 
1799-  1800.  515  : 

True  exposition  of  the  foregoing 
proceedings,  IV.  104,  105,  106.  An- 
swers of  certain  States  to  the  Resolu- 
tions, 106.  The  word  "alone,"  in 
the  draught  of  the  3d.  Resolution, 
struck  out  by  the  II.  of  D.,  166. 
meant  to  confine  the  meaning  of 
'•  parties  to  the  Constitutional  com- 
pact,'' to  the  States  in  the  capacity  in 
in  which  they  formed  the  compact,  in 
exclusion  of  the  State  Governments 
which  did  not  form  it.  166.  Erro- 
neous reason  assigned  for  the  expunc- 
tion.     The  true   one  was  to  exclude 


ill.-  idea  of  the  State  Oouernments  or 
tin"  Federal  Government  being  a 
party.  296.  The  plural  term  "States," 
used  throughout,  distinguished  be- 
tween the  rights  belonging  to  them  in 
their  collective,  from  those  belonging 

to  them  in  their  individual,  capac 
166,  201.  225.  22s,  269,  335,  :;;;.,.  :;:i>. 
The  distinction  intentional,  and  re- 
quired by  the  course  of  reasoning 
employed.  228.  231,  336,  398,  404, 
405.  The  words  "not  law,  bul  null. 
void,  and  of  no  force  and  effect," 
following  the  word " unconstitution- 
al," were  stricken  out  of  the  7th  Res- 
olution. If  they  were  in  Madison's 
draft,  they  were  regarded  onlj  as 
giving  accumulated  emphasis  to  the 
declaration  that  the  A.  and  S.  Acts 
had,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Assembly, 
violated  the  Constitution  of  I'.  §., 
and  not  that  the  addition  of  them 
could  annul  the  Acts  or  sanction  a 
resistance  of  them.  166.  205.  Synon- 
ymous with  "unconstitutional,"  295, 
4ol.  If  the  insertion  of  these  terms 
in  the  draft  could  have  the  effect  of 
showing  an  inconsistency  in  its  author, 
the  striking  of  them  out  would  be  a 
protest  against  the  Nullifying  doc- 
trine which  has  claimed  the  authority 
of  Virginia  in  its  support.  166,  167, 
205,  295.  401.  The  language  and 
scope  of  the  7th  Resolution  controls 
the  3rd.,  167,  269.  336.  412.  The  lie- 
port,  explains  both,  269.  396,  400.  A 
more  explicit  guard  against  miscon- 
struction not  provided,  because  in 
this,  as  in  other  cases  of  omission,  no 
apprehension  was  felt  that  it  could  be 
necessary.  167.  [See  IV.  200,  344, 
348,  354.  J  Term  "respective."  in 
the  3rd  Resolution,  20  1.  205,  229, 
335.  Explanation  of  the  Report  of 
1799.  232.  Improbable  that  the  idea 
of  a  Nullification  by  a  single  - 
bad  ever  entered  the  thoughts  of  a 
single  member*  or  even  those  of  a  citi- 
zen of  S.  Carolina  herself.  232.  Con- 
siderations accounting  for  the  scope 
of  the  reasoning  in  material  parts  of 
the  Resolutions.  &c.,  269,  291,  403. 
State  of  the  question,  and  positions 
and  arguments  on  the  other  side, 
when  the  Virginia  proceedings  took 
place.  335,  396.  Extracts  from  the 
Report  of  1799-1800,  314.  315.  316. 
Distinction  between  a  last  resort,  in 
behalf  of  Constitutional  rights  with- 


088 


GENERAL    INDEX 


[TIR —  YIU 


in  the  forms  of  the  Constitution,  and 
the  ulterior  resorts  to  the  authority 
paramount  to  the  Constitution,  319, 
397.  A  case  between  the  Govern- 
ment of  U.  S.  and  the  Constituent 
body  distinguished 'from  a  case  among 
the  States  themselves  as  parties  to 
the  Constitutional  compact,  335. 
Journal  of  II.  D.  1798  -  '99,  contain- 
ing a  vote  of  the  minority,  expressly 
denying  the  righl  of  a  State  to  de- 
clare, protest,  &c,  &.C.,  and  crushing 
the  assertion  thai  the  right  was  denied 
by  no  one  will)  the  inference  that  the 
Resolutions  nrasi  have  intended  to 
claim  for  the  State  a  Nullifying  inter- 
position, 354.  This  view  does  not  ex- 
clude a  natural  right  in  the  States  in- 
dividually, more  than  in  any  portion 
of  an  individual  State  to  seek  relief. 
by  resistence  and  Revolution,  against 
palpable  and  insupportable  wrongs, 
397.  The  obvious  inference  from  the 
3rd  Resolution  precludes  the  right  of 
a  single  State  to  arrest  or  annul  an 
act  of  the  General  Government  which 
it  may  deem  unconstitutional.  31)7. 
The  light  in  which  the  3rd  and  7th 
Resolutions  are  placed  by  the  Report 
which  explained  and  vindicated  the 
Resolutions,  401,  402,  403.  Answer 
to  the  objection  that  collective  inter- 
position could  not  have  been  meant. 
because  thai  was  a  right  denied  by 
none.  403,  404,  405,  409.  A  series  of 
truisms  in  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence. 403.  The  terms.  "  last 
resort."  as  explained  in  the  Report. 
(1)3,  101.  Comment  of  the  Report  on 
the  7th  Resolution,  405  —  408.  An- 
swer to  the  objection  that  it  belongs 
to  the  Judiciary  of  U.  S.  and  not  to 
the  state  Legislatures  to  declare  the 
meaning  of  the  Federal  Constitution. 

405,  406.  A  Declaration  that  pro- 
ceedings of  the  federal  Government 
are  not  warranted  by  the  Constitu- 
tion, is  nol  a  novelty.  Examples, 405. 
Distinction  between  such  a  declara- 
tion, and  a  Judiciary  exposition,  40."). 
106.  Propriety  of  communicating  it 
to  other  States,  and  inviting  their 
concurrence    in    a   like  declaration, 

406.  Confidence  expressed  in  the 
7th   Resolution   that   the  "  necessary 

anil  proper  measures  will  be  taken 
by  '•  the  other  Slates  for  co-operating 
with  Virginia  in  maintaining  the 
rights,  &c,  reserved   to  the  States  or 


to  the  People.  -10C.  -107.  If  the  other 
Slates  had  concurred  in  a  like  declar- 
ation against  the  Alien  and  Sedition 
laws,  supported,  too,  by  the  numer- 
ous applications  llowing  directly 
from  the  People,  it  can  scarcely  be 
doubted  that  these  simple  means 
would  have  been  as  sufficient  as  they 

are  unexceptionable,  407.  Other 
means  strictly  within  the  limit-'  of 
the  Constitution,  which  might  have 
been  employed,  407.  Proper  or  ex- 
cusable reserve  of  the  General  As- 
sembly in  not  pointing  out  a  choice 
among  them.  4  07.  Topics  which 
were  used  in  recommending  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  Constitution,  407. 
The  argument  equally  proper  to  as- 
sist in  its  interpretation,  ins.  Avow- 
als, introducing  the  proceedings,  and 
in  the  7th  Resolution,  of  that  warm 
affection  to  the  Union  and  its  mem- 
bers, and  of  that  scrupulous  fidelity 
to  the  Constitution,  which  have  been 
invariably  felt  by  the  People  of  Vir- 
ginia, 408.  Conspicuous  historical 
evidence  of  their  sincerity,  408.  The 
Report  gives  not  a  shadow  of  coun- 
tenance to  the  doctrae  of  Nullifica- 
tion, 401).  Under  every  aspect,  it 
enforces  the  argument  and  authority 
against  such  an  apocryphal  version 
of  the  text.  409.  Those  who  resolve 
the  Nullifying  claim  into  the  natural 
right  to  resist  intolerable  oppression, 
are  precluded  from  inferring  that  to 
be  the  righl  meant  by  the  [3d]  Reso- 
lution :  since  that  is  as  little  denied 
as  the  paramountship  of  the  authori- 
ty creating  a  Constitution  over  an  au- 
thority derived  from  it,  409.  At- 
tempts to  show  that  her  Resolutions 
contemplated  forcible  resistance  to 
(he  A.  and  S.  laws.  412.  The  moder- 
ation views.  41&,  413.  As  to  the  mode 
of  interposition  by  the  States  in  their 
collective  character.  413,  414.  Diffi- 
culties of  the  Nullifying  expositors  in 
specifying  the  right  and  mode  of  op- 
position which  the  Resolutions  meant 
to  assign  to  the  Slates  individually, 
111.  Result,  that  the  Nullifiers.  in- 
stead of  proving  that  the  Resolution 
meant  nullification,  would  prove  that 
it  was  altogether  without  meaning. 
111.  Summary  of  conclusions  estab- 
lished by  this  review  of  the  proceed- 
ings of  Virginia  respecting  the  Alien 
and   Sedition   laws,   414.  415.     Vote 


VIR  —  WAS] 


G  E  N  i:  R  A  L     INDEX, 


680 


of  the  II.  of  D.  showing  thai  more 
than  one  third  of  the  whole  number 
denied  the  right  of  the  State  Legisla- 
ture i"  proceed  by  acts  merely  declar- 
atory against  the  Constitutionality  of 
acts  of  Congress;  and  affirmed  that 
the  State-  who  bad  acted  on  the  Res- 
olutions of  Virginia  entertained  the 
same  Bentiments,  416.  Instructions  to 
members  of  Congress;  protest  of  the 
minority  :  and  Report  of  the  Commit- 
tee of  Congress  on  the  Resolutions  of 
Virginia,  417. 

"Vikgima  Resolutions,"  proposed  in 

Congress,  in  1794.  [See  "  Commer- 
cial Resolutions."] 

Viva  voce  testimony  in  all  cases  and 
in  all  Courts,  an  experiment,  1.  194. 


W. 

Waddell.  Mr. ,  II.  217 

"Wadswortii,  Col. ,  I.  G4. 

Wagner,  Jacob,  His  proposed  publica- 
tion! of  the  Archives  of  the  Confed- 
eration, III.  3G2,  363,  564. 

"Waits  Slate  Papers,  III.  515.  IV.  7, 
8,  11.87. 

Walbach,  Col.  John  B.,  III.  397. 

Wal"k,  ,   An  Elector  of  P.  and  V. 

P.,  I.  457. 

Walker,  P.,  I.  576. 

Walker,  Capt.,  I.  60. 

Walker, ,  IV.  562. 

Wallace,  Robert,  His  Treatise  on  the 
numbers  of  mankind,  III.  302,  545. 

Walpole,  Horace,  III.  127. 

Walsh,  Robert,  Letters  to  : 
2  March.        1819,    III.  121 

16  October,  "  "  148 
27  November.  "  "  149 
HJanuary,  1820,  "  163 
23  November,  1826,     "     537 

22  December,  1827,    "     603 

23  January,     1831,   IV.  151 

"     '  "         '<     159 

31  January,  "  "  159 
15  February,  "  ''  163 
22  August,  "         "     194 

His  "Appeal  from  the  judgments  of* 
Great  Britain  concerning  the  U.  S.," 
III.  148,  164. 
Walter,  Lynde,  John  Mack  at.  P.  P.  T. 
De  Grande,  N.  G.  Cabnes  —  Commit- 
tee. Letter  to : 

24  January,  1821,  III.  124. 
W ALTO.v.  Matthew,  Lett  er  to  : 

17  September,  1809,  II  456. 

vol.  iv.  44 


War,  [See  '•  CoKsrrn  ton  of  I 
•■  Deciaration  op  War,"  ■■  Execi  tivb 
Department."]  Barbarity  of  the  en- 
emy in  the  war  in  the  Southern  States, 
I.  49,  50.  Expected  effects  of  the 
change  in  the  military  plan  in  L781, 
51.  Rumor  thai  England  would  sus- 
pend her  offensive  war  against 
the  U.  States,  59.  Between  the  Russ- 
ians and  Turks,  369.  A  maritime 
war  to  which  IT.  S.  should  be  a  partj  . 
and  <;.  B.  neutral  has  no  aspect  which 
is  not  of  an  ominous  cast,  [V.  374, 
375.  Of  all  the  enemies  In  public  lib- 
erty, war  is,  perhaps,  the  mosl  to  be 
dreaded,  491.  492.  The  war  power 
under  the  Constitution  of  U.  S.,  494, 
495.     [See  IV.  400.] 

War  of  1812  with  G.  B.  Plan  of  the 
Executive  for  giving  effect  to  it.  II. 
574,  575.  The  orders  in  Council  of 
printed  in  an  English  news- 
paper, with  an  intimation  that  they 
would  be  forthwith  promulgated, 
were  the  ground  of  the  Embargo, 
IV.  360.  The  British  Envoy  to  U.  S., 
communicated  to  the  President  a  des- 
patch declaring  that  they  would  not, 
&c,  be  revoked,  leaving  to  U  S.  no 
alternative  but  submission  or  war 
360.  They  were  revoked,  but  not  in 
time  to  prevent  the  Declaration  of 
war,  360.  Circumstances  attending 
its  termination.  Silence,  of  the  Eng- 
lish Chancellor  of  Exchequer,  on  the 
occasion  of  a  question  put  to  him  in 
Parliament,  360,  361.  [See  II.  536, 
538.  542,  545,  546,  547,  .".is.  549,  550, 
562.  563,  577,  579,  583.  591,  592,  593, 
594.  600,  602.  606,  607.  111.  4.  57, 
58.  328,  373—426,  554,  559,  560, 
561.] 

Wars,  two  classes  of:  one  from  the 
mere  will  of  the  Government :  the 
other  according  to  the  will  of  the 
Society  itself,  IV.  472. 

Ward,  Robert,  under  Secretary  of 
State  in  G.  B.  II..  349.  His  ''Enquiry 
into  the  foundation  and  history  of  the 
law  of  Nations  in  Europe,"  371,  378, 
379,  380.  Examination  of  his  defence 
of  British  pretensions,  against  neutral 
rights,  366  —  391. 

Warden,  David  B.,  II.  448.  Consul  at 
Paris.  491.  492. 

Warminster,  III.  440. 

Warren,  Admiral  Sir  John  Borlase, 
III.  388.  390. 

"  Washeta,  The,"  H.  394. 


GOO 


GENERAL     INDEX 


[WAS  —  WAS 


Washington,  Bcsiirod,  Letter  to  : 
14  October.  1820,  III.  182. 
[See  I.  387.] 

WASHINGTON,  GEORGE, 
Letters  to  : 

2!)  April,  1783,  I.     64 

2  Julv,  1784,  "     85 
1  January,  1785.  "   119 

11  November,      "  "  199 

9  December,      "  "  205 

1  November,  1786,  "  252 

8  November,      "  "  253 

7  December,      "  "  263 

24  December,  "  "  267 
21  February,  1787,  «  276 
18  March,  "  "  281 
16  April,  "  "  287 
14  October,  '•  "  342 
18  November,  "  "  360 
20  November,      "  "  361 

7  December,       "  "  362 
14  December,       "  "  367 

26  Deceimber,      "  "  368 

14  January,  1788,  "  369 

25  January,  "  "  370 
28  January,          "  «  372 

1  February,        "  "  373 

8  February,        "  "  374 
11  February,        "  "  375 

15  February,        "  "  376 

20  February,         "  "  379 

3  March,              "  "  383 
10  April,               "  «  384 

4  June,  "  "  398 

13  June,  "  '•  399 

18  June,  "  "  400 

23  June,  "  "  401 

25  June,  "  "  401 

27  June,  "  "  402 

21  July,  «  "  403 
15  August,           "  "  409 

24  August,  "  «  412 

14  September,  "  "  416 
21  October,          "  "  429 

5  November,      '•  "436 

2  December,  "  "  439 
14  January,  1789,  "  448 

5  March,             "  "  451 
8  March,              "  "  452 

19  March,  "  "  453 

26  March,  "  «  454 

6  April,  "  "  461 

20  November,  "  "  494 
5  December,  "  "  496 
4  January,  1790,  "  500 

21  June,  1792,  "  563 
24  October,  1793,  "  602 

8  February,  1794,  II.      1 

1  December,  1796,  "  106 


Commander  in  Cliirf.  Accedes  to  a 
farther  exchange  of  the  Convention 
officers,  &c,  I.  38.  His  operations 
against  New  York,  50.  His  arrival  in 
Philadelphia,  56-  His  plan  for  open- 
ing the  navigation  of  the  Potomac, 
90.  His  arrival  at  Richmond,  1()7. 
His  negotiations  with  Maryland,  126. 
Act  of  Virginia  vesting  in  him  a 
certain  interest  in  the  companies  for 
opening  James  and  Potomac  rivers, 
127,  140,  148,  198,  199,  214.  His 
mind,  capable  of  great  views,  and 
long  occupied  with  them,  cannot  bear 
a  vacancy,  127.  Inscription  for 
Houdon's  statue,  231.  Considera- 
tions for  placing  him  at  the  head 
of  the  delegation  to  Philadelphia- 
263.  Difficulties  opposed  to  his  ac- 
ceptance of  the  appointment,  267. 
A  Delegate  to  the  Convention  of 
1787,  275.  284.  III.  521,  587.  Coin- 
cides with  Madison's  views  of  the 
Reform  which  it  ought  to  furnish, 
287.  His  arrival  and  reception  at 
Philadelphia,  329.  Unanimously 
called  to  the  chair,  328.  Will  be 
called  to  the  Presidency  of  the  U.  S., 
1.421,422,441.  Elected  unanimous- 
ly, 451,  457,  458,  462.  His  speech  to 
Congress,  467.  468.  Unanimous 
opinion  that  his  acceptance  of  the 
Presidency  was  essential  to  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Government,  468. 
Serious  illness  and  convalesence.  479, 
485.  Another,  and  critical  illness, 
518.  Recovery,  520.  Negatives  the 
apportionment  bill.  552,  554.  He 
communicates  to  Madison  his  inten- 
tion of  retiring  from  public  life  on 
the  expiration  of  his  four  years,  and 
his  wish  to  advise  with  M.  on  the  mode 
and  time  for  making  known  that 
intention.  Renews  the  communica- 
tion with  a  more  particular  state- 
ment. Madison's  dissuasions,  554, 
559.  Other  interviews  on  the  sub- 
ject, 559,  560.  Writes  to  M..  562. 
His  proclamation  of  Neutrality,  578. 
Criticisms  on  it.  581.  IV.  84.  Snares 
for  his  good  intentions,  I.  582.  His 
visit  to  Virginia,  and  erroneous  views 
of  public  sentiment  there.  589.  Gen- 
eral and  habitual  veneration  for  him, 
596.  II.  17,  18.  His  solicitude  for 
the  success  of  the  French  Republic, 
3,  4.  Supposed  policy  of  his  admin- 
istration. 17.  His  denunciation  of  the 
"  self  created  Societies  perhaps   the 


WAS  —  W  E  A  ] 


GENERAL    INDEX 


691 


greatest  error  of  his  political 
life,"  24,  28.  Danger,  from  party 
movements,  to  his  popularity,  25. 
His  Speech,  and  answers  to  it.  (Deer. 
1795,)  63, 66, 67,  69.  His  anxiety,  &c, 
as  to  Jay's  Treaty,  65.  Ilis '•  Jac- 
obinical speech  to  Adet,"  72,  74. 
"  Spell  within  the  Government,"  80. 
Certainly  that  he  will  not  serve  be- 
yond his  present  (2nd)  term,  83,  103. 
Celebrations  of  his  birth  day,  84,  85, 
130.  Tone  and  tenor  of  his  message 
refusing  to  furnish  the  Treaty  papers, 
89,  90,  94,  96,  97.  Power  of  his 
name,  101.  103.  104,  116,  118.  Ilis 
Message  on  French  Affairs,  113,  114. 
His  action  concerning  spurious  let- 
ters attributed  to  him,  118.  Traits 
of  his  character,  127.  Rumor  that 
he  does  not  well  relish  the  pro- 
ceedings of  President  Adams,  145. 
Medallion  of  him,  463.  Facts,  &c, 
respecting  his  Farewell  Address,  III. 
323,  324.  IV,  115.  The  two  draughts 
made  at  different  epochs,  III.  324.  His 
Inaugural  Speech,  and  Farewell  Ad- 
dress, 482.  Deficiency  in  his  Regis- 
ter of  letters,  582.  Mutilation  of 
some  of  his  papers  by  rats,  582,  583. 
Would  ••have  spurned  a  sceptre,  if 
within  his  grasp."  It  "  was  out  of 
his  reach,  if  he  had  secretly  sighed 
for  it,"  495.  His  sanction  to  Dank 
of  U.  S.  disregarding  a  proposition 
on  that  subject  rejected  in  the  Con- 
vention, 515.  His  appeal,  in  answer 
to  a  call  of  H.  R.  for  papers,  to  his 
personal  knowledge  of  the  intention 
of  the  Convention.  The  Treaty 
making  power,  515.  Probable 
limitation  of  the  sentiments,  "quo- 
ted from  or  for  him,"  respecting  the 
phrase  ••Common  defence  and  general 
welfare,"  531.  Resignation  of  his  com- 
mission, Why  selected  as  the  subject 
of  one  of  the  four  historical  paint- 
ings ordered  by  Congress,  IV.  376. 
In  expressing  the  respect  due  to  him 
by  the  American  People,  "  there  is  no 
limit  or  guide,  but  the  feelings  of 
their  grateful  hearts,"  495.  But, 
"  this  great  and  venerable  name  is 
too  often  assumed  for  what  cannot 
recommend  itself,  and  for  what  there 
is  neither  proof  nor  probability  that 
its  sanction  can  be  claimed,"  495. 
"  Under  color  of  vindicating  an  im- 
portant public  act,  [the  Proclamation 


of  Neutrality]  of  a  Chief  magistrate 
who  enjoys  the  confidence  and  love 
ol  liis  country,  principles  are  advan- 
ced which  strike  at  the  vitids  of  its 
Constitution,  as  well  as  at  iis  honor 
and  true  interest,"  1.  ill  I.  He  never 
wavered  in  the  part  be  took  in  giving 
to  the  Constitution  his  sanction  and 
support,  III.  584.  [See  I.  113,  118, 
121,  160,  232,  253,  25!),  332,  356,  365, 
436,  535,  593,  600.  II.  10,  13,  109, 
114,  115.  III.  182,573.  IV.  68,  71. 
169,  174,  297,  322.  421.]  [See  -  CON- 
VENTION at  Philadelphia,"  &c.] 

Washington-,  Mrs.  Maky,  Monument  to 
her  memory,  IV.  297. 

Washington,  City  op,  Letter  to  Com- 
mittee of  : 

4  March,  1817.  HI.  36. 
Bill  before  II.  R.  for  guarantying  a 
loan  on  a  mortgage  of  the  public  lots 
in  the  Federal  City,  II.  83,  90.  [See 
III.  36.]  Expected  hostile  enterprise 
against  it,  HI.  399.  409.  Estimate  of 
force  and  preparation  for  defence  of 
the  city,  made  up  in  Cabinet  meeting 
July  1, 1814,  409.  Its  capture,  125 
[See  III.  36.] 

•'  Washington  College  Parthenon, "IV. 382 

Washington  National  Monument  So- 
ciety, IV.  382. 

"  Wasp,  The,"  II.  459. 

Wassal,  IV.  476. 

Waterhouse,  Dr.  Benjamin, 
Letters  to  : 
22  June,  1822,  III.  271 

27  December,     "        "     290 
13  July,  1825,    "     492 

12  March,         1829,  IT.     32  • 

May,  1831,    "     180 

21  June,  1833,    "     302 

1  March,  1834,    "     340 

His  "Botanist,"  and  "Heads  of  a 
course  of  Lectures,"  III.  290.  Ilis 
age,  &c,  492,  493.  His  Latinity,  IV. 
32.  His  volume  on  the  authorship 
of  "Junius,"  180.  His  literary  present, 
302.  [See  II.  563.]  His  "  Public 
Lectures,  IV.  340. 

Waterland,  Daniel,  III.  503. 

Watson,  Richard,  Bishop  of  Llandaff, 
III.  127. 

Watterston,    George,    Librarian    of 
Congress,  III.  20. 

Watts,  John,  II.  29,  34. 

Wayne,  Gen.  Anthony,  I.  552.     II.  35. 

Weather,  I.   150,   159,   228,   233,   262, 

266,  733,  389,  577,  582,  590.      II.  28, 


692 


GENERAL     INDEX 


[WEB  —  W  I  L 


70,  120.  122,  128,  130.  131,  13C.  141, 
144,  145,  L56,  157,  220,  526.  III.  5, 
I'd.  34,  35,  38,  98,  2C8,  283,  393. 

Webb,  Foster,  r.  408. 

Webb,  W.,  1.527,529. 

■•  We  tlif  People"  the  introductory 
word-  of  l he  Constitution  of  U.  S., 
IV.  7:;.  Whether  "  We  the  Peo- 
ple." means  the  People  in  their 
aggregate  capacity,  acting  by  a 
numerical  majority  of  the  whole,  or 
by  a  majority  in  each  of  all  the 
States,  the  authority  being  equally 
valid  and  binding,  is  a  question  in- 
teresting only  as  an  historical  fact  of 
merely  speculative  curiosity,  423, 
494. 

Webster,  Daniel,  Letters  to  : 
25  February,  1825.  III.  484 
27  May,      '     L830,  IV.     84 
15  March,        1833,     "     293 
His    speech    on    Foot's    Resolution, 
IV.   69,  70,  84,  296.     His   speech   at 
Pittsburg,  244,  246.     His   speech   in 
U.  S.  Senate  crushes  "  Nullification," 
and    must    hasten    the    abandonment 
of     "  Secession,"     293.        [See     IV. 
392.] 

Webster,  Noah.  Letter  to  : 
January,  1820,  III.  162. 
His  ••  Sketches  of  American  policy." 

III.  185.  Prospectus  of  his  Dictiona- 
ry, 518,  519. 

Webster  Pelitiah,  His  "  Dissertation 
on  the  Political  Union  and  Constitu- 
tion of  the  thirteen  States,"  III. 
185. 

Webster,  Mr.  Til.  281. 

Weightman,  Roger  C,  Letter  to  : 
20  .June.  1826,  IV.  564. 

Weights  and  Measures,  I.  152,  525. 
[See  111.  451.] 

Wellesley,    Richard,    &c.    Marquis. 

II.   473,    174.  478,  480,485,486,487, 

493.  532.  533,  557. 
Wellington,  Arthur,  Duke  of,  II.  557. 

IV.  13. 

West  Indies.  [See '•  Trade."]  Effects 
of  a  tempest,  I.  39,  40.  Trade  with. 
158.  II.  201.  III.  35,  553.  IV.  13. 
Statutory  contest  with  G.  B.  for  a  re- 
ciprocity in  the  W.  I.  Trade,  III.  171, 
180,  2(56,  431.  IV.  468,  489,  493. 
Petition  of  the  W.  1.  planters  to  the 
King  and  Council  of  G.  13.  500,  n. 
[See  11.  12,  15.     IV.  447.] 

Western  Country.  Ordinance  for  the 
Government  of  it,  I.  335.  [See  I. 
412,  417,  453.] 


Western  Defence,  I.  547.  552. 
Western  Insurrection,  II.  T.\. 
Western    Lands,    I.   318.    530.       [See 
'•PUBLIC  Lands.'-]     IJ.  81.  83. 
Western  Posts,   I.   103,  143,  153,  158. 

II.  34. 

Western  Settlements  beyond  the  Ohio,  I. 
318. 
Wharton,  Thomas  J..  Lei  hers  to  : 

14  November,  1826,  111.  535 
August         1827,    ••     586 

5  May,  1828.    "     i;:;i 

His  oration,  4  Jul  v.  1827,  III.  586. 

Wheat.  [See  "  Crops,"  "  Prices.''] 
I.  159.  529.     III.  83. 

Wdeaton.  Henry.  LETTERS  to  : 

15  October,      1823.  III.  338 
llJuly,  1824,     ■■     4  43 

1  April.  1825,     ••     485 

26  February.    1827,     "     553 
His  proposed  Biography  of   W.  Pink- 
ney.  III.  338,  443,  553. 

Whig  party  in  England,  IV.  142,  143. 

Whigs  in  U.  S..  II.  130. 

White.  Alexander.  I.  452,  458,  525, 
576. 

White.  Edward  D..  Letter  to  : 
14  February,  1832.  IV.  215. 

White.  Jddge,  [  '>.  Hugh  L.]  III.  595. 

Wiiitesides. .  II.  146. 

•'  Who  are  the  best  keepers  of  the 
People's  liberties'.'"  IV.  483.  484. 

Widgery.  William,  III.  639. 

Wilder.  Capt.,  His  expedition  for  the 
discovery  of  a  N.  W.  passage  III. 
626. 

Wilkes.  John.  I.  1.    II.  150. 

Wilkinson,  Gen.  James.  Query  as  to 
an  anonymous  letter  in  Clark's 
••  Prodi's  of  the  corruption  of  Gen. 
James  Wilkinson."  Ac..  II.  492.  His 
objection  to  an  order  for  a  Court 
martial,  and  to  the  constitution  of  the 
Court.      Application   for    time.    At.. 

III.  397,  398,  407.     [See    I.    553.     II. 
191.  396.  401.  491.  52ii.     III.  395.  404. 

IV.  365.] 
Wilkinson.  .  II.  26. 

William   &   Mary    College.       Proposed 
removal  of  it  from  Williamsburg,  III. 
439,  476.  477.  480.     Value  of  'lands 
given  to  the  University,  I.  88. 
Williams.  C.  P..  Letter  to  : 
Febuary,  1820,  III.  166. 
Williams.    Gen..    [  ?   David   Pi..]    III. 
390.  392. 

WiLi.isroN.  C.  Femmore.  Letters  to: 
19  March,  1836,  IV.  131 
13  May,        "       "    433 


WIS— III] 


GENERAL    INDEX 


G93 


Williamsburg,  Cenvention  at,  III.  59« 
[See  III.  140,  439.] 

WILSON,  JAMES,  Associate  Justice  of 
Supreme  Court  of  U.  S.,  II.  84.  His 
speeches  in  the  Pennsylvania  Conven- 
tion, 1787,  III.  151,  163,  544.  A  pa- 
per composed  by  him  February  13, 
1770,  to  mature  the  public  mind  for 
the  event  of  Independence.  605.  His 
"Considerations  on  the  Bank  of 
North  America,"  IV.  127. 

Wilmington,  N.  C,  III.  409. 

Wilson, ,  a  clergyman,  IV.  212. 

Wilson, ,  II.  39.     I.  248,  424.     II. 

39. 

Winchester,  Gen.  James,  II.  549. 

Winder,  GEN.  William  H..  III.  412, 
415,  419,  422,  423.  His  gallantry, 
&c,  IV.  363. 

Winder,  William  II..  Letter  to  : 
15  September,  1834,  IV.  363. 

Wine.  Considerations  in  favor  of  in- 
troducing a  native  wine,  III.  263. 

Wirt,  William.  Letters  to  : 
30  September,  1813,    II.  573 
5  May,  1828,  III.  632 

1  October,  1830,  IV.  113 
12  October.  "  «  117 
His  Biography  of  Patrick  Henry.  III. 
632.  His  Address  to  the  Societies  of 
Rutgers  College,  and  opinion  on  the 
case  of  the  Cherokees,  IV.  113.  His 
notice  of  Henry's  connexion  with  the 
question  of  independence,  III.  105. 
His  motives  in  not  declining  the 
cause  of  the  Cherokees,  IV.  117,  118. 
Attorney  General  of  U.S.  His  opin- 
ion, 22  October,  1823,  in  the  case  of 
Gen.  Swartwout's  commission  as 
Navy  Agent  at  New  York,  351.  Ken- 
nedy's Discourse  on  his  Life  and 
character.  344.  Among  the  most  dis- 
tinguished ornaments  which  his 
country   could   boast,  Ac,  344,   345. 

Wiseman,  Sir  Robert,  II.  320. 

Wolcott,  Oliver,  A  Commissioner  to 
treat  with  the  Indians,  I.  104.  [See 
1.598.     11.64.] 

Wolftos,  (John  Christian  Von  Wolff,) 
His  Treatise  on  the  law  of  Nature 
and  Nations,  I.  614. 

Wolverhampton,  IV.  476. 

Woman.  Capacity  of  the  female  sex 
for  studies  of  the  highest  order,  III. 
232.     [See  HI.  617.] 

Wood,  Joseph,  Letter  to: 
27  February,  1836,  IV.  427. 

Wood.   Gen.  ,  An   elector  for  P. 

and  V.  P.,  I.  457. 


Woon,  Major. ,  III.  421. 

Wood.  .  II.  26. 

Woodford,     (Jen.    ,    His    death, 

I.  39. 

Wooduocse,  James,  Experiment  by, 
III.  81. 

Woodward,  Augustus  B..  Letter  to  : 

11  September,  1824,  III.  452. 
His    expedient  for    a    standard    of 
measures  and  weights,  III.  451. 

Woodward. .  HI.  127. 

Wormlev.  Ralph.  Jr.,  I.  387. 

worthtngton,  gen.  ,  iii.  414. 

Wright,  Miss  Frances,  Letteb  to  : 

1  September,  1825,  III.  495 
Her  plan  for  the  abolition  of  slavery 
in  the  U.  S.,  III.  495,  496,  497,  541. 
Her  talents,  disinterestedness,  views 
of  amalgamating  the  white  and  black 
races,  and  notions  on  religion  and 
marriage,  620.  Her  sister's  "  wed- 
lock," 620.  621.  [See  III.  195.] 
Wrong  heads.  II.  99. 

Wythe,  George,  I.  142,  150,  199,203. 
261,  271.  273.  328,  333,  339,  387.  II. 
43,  45,  79.  III.  278,  337,  580.  IV. 
320.  A  Delegate  to  the  Convention 
Of  1787,  I.  275.  Did  not  return  to  it 
after  the  death  of  his  wife,  354.  Re- 
ported change  in  his  political  senti- 
ments, 595. 

Wytue,  Mrs.,  Her  death,  I.  339 


Yard.  Mr.,  II.  26,  68,  91. 

Yarns  for  household  looms,  III. 
171. 

Yates,  Robert,  A  Delegate  from  N. 
York  to  the  Federal  Convention,  I. 
282.  A  palpable  misstatement  in 
his  Notes  of  Debates  of  the  Conven- 
tion of  1787,  III.  226,  227,  229.  His 
prejudices  and  errors,  244,  546.  IV. 
10.  His  crude  and  broken  notes. 
faulty  and  fallible  mode  of  reporting, 
his  presence  during  the  early  discus- 
sions only,  Ac.  In.  11.  167,  207,  208, 
288,  323.  He  and  his  colleague, 
(John  Lansing.)  represented  the  dom- 
inant party  in  N.  York,  which  was 
opposed  to  the  Convention  and  its 
object,  and  left  it  in  the  midsl  of 
its  discussions,  288,  310.  381.  Said 
to    be     a    respectable    and    honora- 


694 


GENERAL    INDEX 
[See    II.  35, 


[TEO  —  YRD 


ble    man,    &c,    381 

39.] 

Yeo,  Sir  James  L.,  III.  390. 
Yohogania,  I.  126. 
York     in    Canada,    III.    395,    396, 

403. 

rorktovm,     III.     471.       Trumbull's 


painting   of   Cornwallis's   surrender, 
IV.  376. 

Yrujo,  Marquis  de  casa,  Minister 
from  Spain  to  U.  S.,  II.  178,  182, 
186,  197,  203,  220-  His  recall, 
209,  393,  398,  401.  His  mills, 
437. 


THE    END. 


OS