Page images
PDF
EPUB

sanctions. As to the case of post roads & military roads; instead of implying a general power to make roads, the constitutionality of them must be tested by the bona fide object of the particular roads. The Post cannot travel, nor troops march without a road. If the necessary roads cannot be found, they must of course be provided.

Serious danger seems to be threatened to the genuine sense of the Constitution, not only by an unwarrantable latitude of construction, but by the use made of precedents which cannot be supposed to have had in the view of their Authors, the bearing contended for, and even where they may have crept, thro' inadvertence, into acts of Congs & been signed by the Executive at a midnight hour, in the midst of a group scarcely admitting perusal, & under a weariness of mind as little admitting a vigilant attention.

Another & perhaps a greater danger is to be apprehended from the influence which the usefulness & popularity of measures may have on questions of their Constitutionality. It is difficult to conceive that any thing short of that influence ca have overcome the constitutional and other objections to the Bill on roads & Canals which passed the 2 Houses at the last Session.

These considerations remind me of the attempts in the Convention to vest in the Judiciary Dep a qualified negative on Legislative bills. Such a Controul, restricted to Constitutional points, besides giving greater stability & system to the rules of

expounding the Instrument, would have precluded the question of a Judiciary annulment of Legislative Acts. But I am running far beyond the subject presented in your letter, and will detain you no longer than to assure you of my highest respect & sincerest regard.

TO CHARLES J. INGERSOLL.

MAD. MSS.

MONTPELLIER, Jany 4, 1818

DR SIR, I have recd your letter of the 25th Ult.1 Believing that the late war merits a historical review penetrating below the surface of events, and beyond the horizon of unexpanded minds, I am glad to learn that the task is contemplated by one whose talents, and, what is not less essential, whose fairness of dispositions, are entitled to so much confidence. Whatever be the light in which any individual actor on the public Theatre may appear, the contest exhibited in its true features cannot fail to do honor to our Country; and, in one respect particularly, to be auspicious to its solid & lasting interest. If our first struggle was a war of our infancy, this last was that of our youth; and the issue of both, wisely improved, may long postpone, if not forever prevent, a necessity for exerting the strength of our manhood.

With this view of the subject, and of the hands

' Ingersoll had been a warm supporter of the war from the beginning. The work he was undertaking appeared in four volumes (Philadelphia, 1845-'52) under the title Historical Sketch of the Second War between the United States and Great Britain.

[ocr errors]

into which it is falling, I cannot be unwilling to contribute to the Stock of Materials. But you much overrate I fear, "my private papers, as distinct from those otherwise attainable. They consist for the most part of my correspondence with the heads of Departments, particularly when separated from them, and of a few vestiges remaining of Cabinet Consultations. It has been my purpose to employ a portion of my leisure, in gathering up and arranging these, with others relating to other periods of our public affairs; and after looking over carefully the first, I shall be better able to judge how far, they throw any valuable rays on your object, and are of a nature not improper for public use.

Be pleased, Sir, to accept assurances of my esteem and cordial respects.

TO JACOB GIDEON.

MONTPELLIER, 28. January, 1818

SIR, I have rect your letter of the 19th, and in consequence of the request it makes, I send you a Copy of the 1st Edition of the "Federalist," with the names of the writers prefixed to their respective numbers.1 Not being on the spot, when it was in

1 See ante, Vol. V., pp. 54, 55, n. Gideon inclosed a list of the numbers of the Federalist and requested Madison to give the names of the author of each. Madison wrote to him on February 20th:

I have recd your letter of the 12th. Your are welcome to the Copy of the Federalist sent you. If you refer to it in your proposed Edition it will be more proper to note the fact that the numbers with my name prefixed were published from a Copy containing corrections in my

the Press, the errors now noted in mine were not then corrected. You will be so good as to return the 2 vols when convenient to you.

hand, than to use the phrase "revised & corrected by J. M" which would imply a more careful & professed revisal, than is warranted by strict truth.

You seem not rightly to have understood my remark on the circumstance of including in an Edition of the Federalist a pamphlet written by one of its authors, which had been answered in one written by another. My object was to suggest for your consideration how far it wa be proper to insert in your Edition the former; not to suggest the insertion of both. The occasion, the plan, and the object of the Federalist, essentially distinguish it from the two pamphlets; and there may be a double incongruity in putting into the same Publication a work in which the two writers co-operated, and productions at once unconnected with it, and in which they are so pointedly opposed to each other.

That the motive to these observations may not be misconceived, it will not be amiss to say, that altho' I cannot at this day but be sensible that in the pamphlet under the name of Helvidius a tone is indulged which must seek an apology in impressions of the moment, and altho' in other respects it may be liable to criticisms for which the occasions are increased by the particular haste in which the several papers were written, to say nothing of inaccuracies in transcribing them for the press, yet I see no ground to be dissatisfied with the constitutional doctrine espoused, or the general scope of the reasoning used in support of it.-Mad. MSS.

On the same subject Madison wrote to Richard Cutts March 14: As it appears from your letter of the 5th that Mr. Gideon adheres to his plan of publishing the 2 pamphlets in the same volumes with the Federalist, and desires a corrected Copy of the one written by me, I have thought it best to send one. Be so good as to let it be put into his hands. I have limited the corrections to errors of the press, and of the transcriber; and a few cases in which the addition of a word or two seemed to render the meaning more explicit. There are passages to which a turn a little different might have been conveniently given; particularly that speaking of treaties as laws, which might have been better guarded agst a charge of inconsistency with the doctrine maintained on another occasion; and which probably wa have been so guarded, after the accurate investigation of the Con stitutional doctrine occasioned by Mr. Jay's Treaty. The reasoning

The 2 Edition of the Work comprised a pamphlet ascribed to one of its Authors. The pamphlet had no connection with the Plan to which the others were parties, and contains a comment on an im

however in the pamphlet is not affected by the question of consistency; and as the Author of Pacificus is charged with the want of it, I have chosen rather, to let the passage stand as it was first published, than to give it what might be considered a retrospective meaning. Intelligent readers will be sensible that the scope of the argument did not lead to a critical attention to Constitutional doctrines properly called forth on other occasions. If you think it worth while you may give Mr. Gideon a hint of these observations.-Mad. MSS. The two pamphlets are those of Pacificus (Hamilton) and Helvidius (Madison). (See ante, Vol. VI., p. 138, n.) Gideon's edition was: "The Federalist, or the New Constitution, Written in the Year 1788, by Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Madison, and Mr. Jay with an Appendix, containing the Letters of Pacificus and Helvidius, on the Proclamation of Neutrality of 1793; also, the Original Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution of the United States, with the Amendments made thereto. A New Edition. The Numbers Written by Mr. Madison Corrected by Himself. City of Washington: Printed and Published by Jacob Gideon, Jun. 1818."

TO JAMES K. PAULDING.

MAD. MSS

MONTPR July 23. [1818.]

DR SIR I return your Copy of Gideon's Edition of the Federalist, with the memorandums requested in your note of the 16th. I shall take a pleasure in adding any other circumstances which you may wish to know, and I may be able to communicate.

The following memorandum complies with Mr. Paulding's request of the 16th instant:

The papers under the title of "Federalist," and signature of "Publius" were written by A. H., J. M. & J. J. in the latter part of the year 1787. & the former part of the year 1788. The immediate object of them was to vindicate & recommend the new Constitution to the State of N. Y. whose ratification of the instrument, was doubtful, as well as important. The undertaking was proposed by A. H. (who had probably consulted Mr. Jay & others) to J. M, who agreed to take a part in it. The papers were originally addressed to the people of N. Y. under the signature of a "Citizen of N. Y." This was changed for that of "Publius" the first name of Valerius Publicola. A reason

« PreviousContinue »