|
First Democrat |
||
|
Copyright © 2001 by Dave Badtke |
||
|
March 16 marked the 250th anniversary of James Madison’s birth, and to celebrate, I read Founding Brothers, by Joseph J. Ellis. Beginning with the “interview” (duel) between Burr and Hamilton (Burr, Jefferson’s Vice President, killed Hamilton in 1804), the book goes on to paint a fascinating picture of the leaders and critical events of the period. (If you’re interested in participating in a founding-fathers reading day next year around Presidents’ Day, during which we could read from Ellis’ book and literature of the period, please contact me.) Madison at five feet six inches, sickly—though he would live to be 85—with a boyish appearance, was a diminutive member of the exclusive founding-father’s club which included Jefferson at six feet two inches and Washington, standing yet another two inches taller, who, according to John Adams, “…was invariably selected to lead every national effort [because] he was always the tallest man in the room.” Madison compensated for his small stature through hard work and indefatigable study—he attended Princeton University when it was the College of New Jersey, completing his studies in just two years—and with a diplomatic, self-effacing demeanor that frequently put him at the negotiating center of the critical issues that threatened to rend the new American republic. He was a prolific and respected writer who crafted the Virginia Plan which provided the framework for the Constitution. As a member of the first House of Representatives, he sponsored the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, arguing constantly for freedom of religion, speech and press. And, collaborating with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, he wrote 29 of the 85 Federalist Papers printed in New York newspapers to encourage ratification of the Constitution. These documents became a constitutional exegesis critical to national understanding and acceptance of a document that had been created extra-legally, in secret, by a group ostensibly convened to simply correct deficiencies in the Articles of Confederation. Madison argues in The Federalist X, his first contribution to the series, that contrary to common belief, republics can be formed from large and diverse states provided factional effects are controlled: “There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects…. It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it is worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction, what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be a less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency…. The inference to which we are brought, is, that the causes of faction cannot be removed; and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects.” Read the entire essay. You will find Madison’s insight and analysis rewarding, though you may be distressed that our understanding of republican processes has not improved with the passage of 213 years. (Is it worse?) Additionally, today’s arguments regarding government’s role are remarkably similar to the disputes between Madison and Hamilton which led to the formation of political parties. Hamilton advocated a strong federal government with centralized banking. Madison, like Jefferson, didn’t trust bankers: “They all live in cities.” To increase support for his Revolutionary War debt repayment plan, Hamilton formed the Federalist Party. In response, Madison and Jefferson created the Republican Party which became the Democratic Party during Andrew Jackson’s presidency. In 1860 a new Republican Party was formed to support Abraham Lincoln’s campaign against Stephan Douglas, a Democrat, who tried to straddle the slavery issue, as did Madison. Quakers petitioned Congress in 1790 to abolish slavery, with Benjamin Franklin’s support. (Especially interesting is Franklin’s parody of Georgia’s senator Jackson in which Sidi Mehemet Ibrahim argues for the enslavement of Christians.) Though Madison despised slavery, he feared that the issue would threaten the fragile American union and responded in written House debate with “enlightened obfuscation”: “If this folly did not reproach the public councils, it ought to excite no regret in the patrons of Humanity & freedom. Nothing could hasten more the progress of these reflections & sentiments which are secretly undermining the institution which this mistaken zeal is laboring to secure against the most distant approach of danger.” This babble demonstrates that even our most persuasive, logical founding father couldn’t come to terms with slavery. The population in 1790 was 3.9 million of which 18%, almost 700,000, were slaves. Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia had 91% of the slaves, and Georgia and South Carolina were threatening secession if there was a vote on slavery. If Madison had spoken against slavery and called their bluff, would a compromise have been forged that would have led to a fairer America 75 years—four generations of slaves—sooner? Probably not and unproductive to speculate: Better we celebrate Madison at his best than disparage him for what might have been. |
||
|
- Dave Badtke can be contacted at: www.CarquinezReview.com; Dave@Badtke.com; PO Box 763, Benicia, CA 94510; or by calling 707-745-5540.
|