Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

2. How do you explain the dynamic that kept Madison and Jefferson closely aligned; even though they were dramatically different men?

It was interesting how Feldman presented the framework of his book in the Preface outlining how he would explore the different roles of James Madison, that of genius, partisan and president. I liked the comparison of Madison to Newton or Einstein regarding the drafting of the Constitution, particularly when you think of the Constitution as a viable framework of our democracy throughout the history of this nation. As Feldman points out, Madison imagined its necessity, designed it, and then developed the theory that would justify it, as he then sought to convince the nation to ratify the Constitution in Philadelphia.

I think that it was toward this end that both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison remained close and politically aligned throughout this period of time when they both were instrumental in the formation of this democracy. Both men assumed many different and influential positions widening their individual perspective and strengthening their alliance.

@26 "Preface continued. 2. Was Martha Washington right that seeing Jefferson at her door was the second most painful experience that she had had since the loss of her husband? ..."

Thank you for the link, Bentley. It was interesting background information. I couldn't say whether she was right... but I can see her perspective as understandable.

According to General Lafayette, she loved "her husband madly" (Wikipedia). I can believe that. The article said that Martha could have married a richer man, but that she chose Washington. And that she traveled thousands of miles to be with Washington during the revolution. She could have stayed home and have remained in greater safety and certainly in greater comfort.

So I'm thinking that loving him as she had, and being witness to the private emotions that Washington felt, she knew very well how deeply hurt he had been by Benedict Arnold's betrayal. Arnold... Washington had given him his fullest trust. Arnold betrayed that trust AND the revolution.

Jefferson, too, was seen by Washington as betraying.

So ... conjecture... Jefferson appeared there at her door, she would naturally have thought about all the emotional pain Jefferson had caused her husband.

I look forward to see what we learn about the various relationships of the founders as we read on.


Wikipedia, "Martha Washington"

And I read the link:

5. We hear a lot about sanctions today whether in terms of a trade war or against our adversaries - how effective do you think these sanctions have been or are?

With respect to Madison's era, refusing to trade was a tactic that was used frequently; keeping in mind, there weren't too many other leveraging tools available (to influence change).

Contrast with today's advanced technological capabilities - trade embargoes have mixed success. The difficulty resides with the effectiveness of diplomacy; examples - the difficult, Iran, and the challenging, China. In the latter, we are able to use trade / diplomacy to an effective degree, for both parties continue to work together towards their selfish interests. In the case of the former, the unintended consequence of a trade embargo (Iran) is the innocent Iranian people, and not the corrupt Iranian government regime.

In conclusion, the effectiveness of trade embargoes goes hand in hand with the ability to effect diplomacy. In Madison's era, the British were not "as willing" participants to grant the colonists stature as a negotiating party; consequently, the usage of trade embargoes was deployed towards protesting policy or issues.

"2. Was it interesting to you how the author described Madison as the Newton or Einstein of the Constitution? How much do we owe Madison from your viewpoint of being able to think through and imagine and document that which we still hold dear today: The Constitution of the United States?."

I had never thought of Madison as the Newton or Einstein of the Constitution, but in a way he was very much like them. Both Newton and Einstein took the "puzzle" pieces of what other scientists had done and put the pieces all together into a working model. Madison does the same thing, he researches republics/governments and puts the pieces of what he has learned into the constitution.

Bentley wrote: "Sign up here if you plan to participate. I will be not be sending out an event notification nor a broadcast.

In the future, I will get back to that practice for every book - but right now I am co..."
I will participate but never got a notice that you were beginning FYI

Glad you're here, Vincent.

Thank you, Vince.

We are happy that you have joined us. Bentley did not send out an event notification as you noted above. We are all just beginning Week 2 now. We are looking forward to your participation.

Bentley wrote: "Sign up here if you plan to participate. I will be not be sending out an event notification nor a broadcast.

In the future, I will get back to that practice for every book - but right now I am co..."

I'm with you

Vince

Bentley wrote: "Remember the following:

Everyone is welcome but make sure to use the goodreads spoiler function if you get ahead of the assigned weekly pages.

If you come to the discussion after folks have fini..."


but I would assume that if one doesn't go past the date of the end of that section spoiler control is not necessary - i.e. the first 40pages ended August 16 - so as I am up to that I can post what I want as long as I follow the general rules and do not reply to any posts that are after those posted on that date.

Right?

Week Two: August 17th - August 23rd

Chapter Two: Rise - p. 41-83

Vincent wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Remember the following:

Everyone is welcome but make sure to use the goodreads spoiler function if you get ahead of the assigned weekly pages.

If you come to the discussion after..."

Vince, you are correct. So actually this week we are on Week Two so you may actually post about your reading through Chapter Two through page 83.

I just got the book from the library in the mail and I read the first chapter. I've read another biography of Madison before but already this one seems more insightful and deep than the one I read. I know this isn't a huge part of the chapters so far, but I liked the quick note about how back then men who were friends would talk about affection and even love for each other. I think we miss that in our own time and era. We need to be okay with expressing such familiarity with close friends and open up to others more. Of course, this is somewhat ironic given the author noting that Madison came for education not friendship (4).

We are glad that you are joining us in this read, J.W. I have no doubt that this biography may seem more insightful than some biographies of Madison, since the author Noah Feldman is a Professor of Law at Harvard. I suspect that there will be a lot of focus on the Constitution as well.

I found the note you are referring to about men at that time expressing more affection for one another interesting as well. That is clear when you read a lot of correspondence from that era. There is some irony that Madison came for education, not friendship.

In my reading through page 83, I’m most impressed by Madison’s research and preparation for the convention via reading history and more specifically, studying the peculiarities of Europe’s confederations, past and present. In my mind, that was an enabler for his influence towards a “more perfect union� which, we’re about to read.

J.W. wrote regarding male friendships

I found that interesting as well. Especially when one considers that in the main these men had less contact with one another then male friends today. Following the 1783 Congress, "they would not see each other for six years" (p.53, Back to the Beginning)

There were no phone calls. The poor transportation systems made traveling even to a relatively near neighbor time-consuming. There wasn't the immediacy of the internet, nor even the 2-3 day USPS. But on the other hand, it seems that within their correspondence they conveyed more than we do today.

Chapter 1: Rise: Money "Madison wanted to help put the country on a more stable financial footing...(p.33) ... The depressing picture of borrowing during the War of Independence... (p.34)"

The country needs a more stable financial system today, too. Borrowing today, too. Always seems to be more seemingly necessary expenses than income.

Chapter 1: Rise: In Philadelphia. Back to the Beginning.

I probably shouldn't have been, but I was astounded by the travel times. "Bad roads made Madison's journey of 230 miles from Montpelier to Philadelphia into a twelve-day ordeal" (35). "Madison's journey was so delayed by rain and flooding that it took him nine days to travel the hundred miles..."(p.53)

My sister lived 200 miles away. I used to make it to her place easy in three hours.

I was struck by that travel time, too! 12 days to go 230 miles? You could walk that quickly if you'd a mind to do it! But of course, you couldn't do that with flooding/rain. It's so easy to take advantage of the modern conveniences we have--and as one person pointed out with my previous comment, the USPS is certainly one of those!

J.W. wrote: "I was struck by that travel time, too! 12 days to go 230 miles? You could walk that quickly if you'd a mind to do it! But of course, you couldn't do that with flooding/rain. It's so easy to take ad..."

JW, Brian @64 wrote about the reading and research that Madison did prior to writing the constitution. I'm wondering now whether the slow travel might have been conducive towards mulling over in his mind what he had read? One's mind has to be engaged in something, yes?

Chapter 1: Rise: Pursuing the Affair.

Our cultural mores have certainly changed! "In 1783, when Madison made his intentions known, she [Kitty Floyd] was fifteen... He was thirty-two" (45).

From this same section, I think we can conjecture Madison as much more emotionally constrained than Jefferson. Madison discounts the stories of Jefferson's emotional devastation on the death of his [Jefferson's] wife. Jefferson seemed more active in Madison's courtship of Kitty than Madison. It will be interesting to read about the courtship of Madison and Dolley .

Did he pursue her more ardently? Were the two encouraged together as Jefferson had encouraged this first match? Was it a coolly rational decision on Madison's part that he should have a wife?

Adelle wrote: "I'm wondering now whether the slow travel might have been conducive towards mulling over in his mind what he had read? One's mind has to be engaged in something, yes?"

Indeed! They didn't have podcasts or audiobooks to occupy themselves for long travels!

Questions that have come to mind while I read the 2nd chapter:

Travel was obviously very slow, but how exactly did he travel? Horseback or carriage? If he was in a carriage would he have brought some of his books and continued his studies while in route? (Or would it have been to bumpy?)

We know he had Billey with him in Philadelphia, would he have taken a different slave with him after Billey was sold as he traveled around Virginia?

In Patrick Henry's proposal, how would they keep track of which church gets what tax collected funds? That seems like a logistical nightmare that could easily benefit the churches of those doing the accounting. Would tax money go to non-Christian churches as well? (According to Wikipedia there was a small group of Jews in Virginia at this time period. )

Bentley wrote: "This is a very interesting article about James Madison and free speech.

James Madison's Lessons of Free Speech


Detail of James Madison portrait by John Vanderlyn, 1816 (White House Historical As..."


before the bullhorn of the internet and the anonymity it can give it was different to state an opinion - when the sayer or the author was generally known and had to face arguments.............. just an observation

Boy there seems a lot here that is past page 84........

Through the end of the "Rise" chapter. Right?

I began with a preconceived idea of Madison as something of an idealist. At this point, it seems to me that he first conceives of things as how they "should be, ideally."

But he has a thoroughly practical side. What's that Kissinger word? realpolitik.

Not providing alcohol at elections. /OK. Alcohol. No national bank./ OK. National bank. No parties. / OK. Political parties.

And Billey.

"To Madison, there was no ambiguity about whether the 'men' whom the Declaration of Independence had declared to be equal included persons of African descent. Liberty was for 'every human being,' including Billey" (Rise: Heading Home, p52).

Here, too, Madison takes the practical approach. He doesn't want to "taint" the slaves back home. He doesn't free him. He sells him.

Madison may well have been capable of conceiving of idealized circumstances...but he knew whereof he spoke when he said (or wrote) "men are no angels."

Adele, you’re right about Madison not being among the angels! However, he does seem to have developed a political sensitivity. Witness his using logical arguments to persuade his colleagues to enable religious liberty in Virginia.

Regarding his maneuvers and arguments on behalf of religious liberty.... Yes. Because that was his end goal. But it seems to me that he succeeded through practical actions that would further his cause.

Rise, Establishment, p.62, Madison was a bit like a player on Survivor. "He abandoned his opposition to the bill that incorporated the Episcopal Church" (which he originally opposed) and undertook to block the passage of the general assessment bill (when that bill looked as though it might pass). By playing the two bills---neither of which he really wanted---against one another, the issue was delayed for a year. Good politics.

Yes, he wrote some logical arguments...but he strategically sent the petitions only to the areas that he thought would back his position and sign (p63).

"Madison then chose the most extreme possible comparison" (p65). The Inquisition.

And then, too, "Madison chose to publish anonymously" (p66). A good part of me would have thought more highly of Madison had he forthrightly acknowledged his authorship and efforts.

I figure he thought his preferred bill would have a better chance of success if it weren't associated with himself. I think he looks at the end result.

"Madison had learned how to win" (p67).

This is this week's assigned reading:

Week Three: August 24th - August 30th (84 - 125)
Chapter Three: Crisis - p. 84

I just picked up the book. Looking forward to this reading. I have read other books about James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. I hope this author addresses my biggest question. How did the co-author of the Federalist Papers become such an acolyte of Thomas Jefferson and a believer in states rights?

Glad to have you with us Jerry. Where are you reading from? We are a global group and it is alway fun to know what city/town/village/country folks are from (just approximate for security).

That is a big question isn't it - because some of what Madison proposed in the Federalist Papers are diametrically opposed to his Jefferson connection. The morphing of his ideas probably contributed to the break down of his relationship with Hamilton.

Chapter 3. Crisis.

Wait. What??

Madison reads up on various confederacies. "Madison's counterintuitive lesson was that strong central authority could emerge even among states that feared being dominated by other members for the confederacy-- provided fear and hatred [of another, such as Great Britain] persisted to create national unity" (p. 76 Confederations and Their Vices)

" Madison was beginning to develop theory of minority protection" .. " Madison found himself unhappy with the consequences of the majoritarian principle ...[ i.e. That the interests of the majority is the political standard of right and wrong"] (To Annapolis, p. 80).

" This led to a basic problem: 'Whenever therefore an apparent interest or common passion unites the majority what is to restrain them from on just violations of the rights and interests of
the minority, or of
individuals?'" (Vices, p.97)

But then THIS regarding the question of proportional representation:

The eastern states would like it...it would be in their interest. The southern states would like it...it would be in their interest.

"As for the small states, Madison was dismissive: ' If a majority of the larger states concur, the fewer and smaller states must finally bend to them" (The Plan, p. 102).

Because it's what I want, so majority rules.

Of course we remember that from the start Madison wanted proportional representation... I don't think it's a direct quote, but the smaller states can pound sand.

In my readings ( pages 84-125 ), Madison is strategically prepared, drawing upon his research and psychology of the delegates of Congress. Like a superb debate coach, he patiently allows the thought process to unfold and he knew that divisions would eventually have to be encountered before growing consensus. I was most impressed with his insistence on “minority representation� and a “national negative�, both of these theories prevalent in our present structure of government. We are not there in terms of reading regarding the eventual acceptance of both those theories by the delegates, but as a reader, I’m of realization that James Madison is the father of minority rights / checks and balances. Every critic of the electoral college today should be reading this book for further illumination into the whys. Further, quite irresponsible ( critics ).

Chapter 4. Philadelphia.

In which we learn that from even before our Congress and Senate were agreed upon, before our Constitution was determined, sausage was being made. ;-)

Well, Adele, even brainy delegates like Madison have to eat!
Regards,
Andrea

Andrea wrote: "Well, Adele, even brainy delegates like Madison have to eat!
Regards,
Andrea"

Wasn't he just the brainest guy? He knew his stuff backwards and forwards!

Oh, not just Madison. Indeed, on proportional vs. equal representation, Madison, it seemed to me, was much less willing than some of the others to make a deal. (On principle---because he believed his position was just/right. On practicality/power: because he thought the large states COULD impose their will and that the smaller states would eventually come in on the terms the large states preferred.

"Events seemed to be proceeding as Madison had planned. The big states continued to win important votes, and the small states, he believed, would ultimately have little choice but to go along" (Ch 4, "The Farmer," p 120).

And I wonder...how might Madison's position have been different had he been born and raised and grown to political stature in a small state?

The 3/5ths rule---How to count slaves as a share of population. Trade offs. When it was in the interest of the larger, slave-holding states, they wanted slaves counted as less than whole so they would be assessed a lower share of taxes. When it was in their interest to count them as whole, so they would have a larger population base counted, then they wanted them counted as whole.

"The speeches ... gave the impression of high-flown, principled debate...But Charles Pinkney, with his usual lack of finesse: 'Give New Jersey an equal vote, and she will dismiss her scruples..." (Ch 4, "Authorized," p. 132).

I'm not certain Feldman's book brings this up, but I read in Ketcham's book, _James Madison_, "The Western lands were an especially sore point.... {The small states wanted the large western tracts of land claimed by the larger states to be ceded to the Union as a whole.} Many of the delegates had a personal investment... " (James Madison, "The Federal Convention," p. 214)

I found the chapter fascinating. Thank you, James Madison, for taking such extensive notes. It was just fascinating to "see" the give-and-take, the power plays, interspersed with well-presented arguments from several positions. "The task was so laborious that late in life Madison said it 'almost killed' him..." (James Madison, p 207).

Reading it though, did bring to mind that Bismarck quote: "Laws are like sausages. Better not to see them being made."

by Ralph Louis Ketcham (no photo)

"Madison had believed that the small states would follow the large states because they would have no choice: The strong would do what they could and the weak would have to bear it. (Ch 4, "A Species of Property," p. 150).

Did anyone else think on "The Median Dialogue"?

The Athenians: "You know and we know, as practical men, that the question of justice arises only between parties equal in strength, and that the strong do what they can, and the weak submit."

by Thucydides

Chapter 4. Secrecy.

1) I WAS impressed that they didn't have leaks.

2) I came to believe that they were able to have freer, more productive discussions because they were operating in secret without having "to speech" false words for the benefit of the voting public. Seems awful to write that...but it strikes me as true. In an age of CSPAN and open hearings, I doubt they would have forged the wonderful document they did.

Chapter 4.

I in no way expect people from a different time to hold the same views or opinions that are popular today. There's a word for that...or a phrase... I'll look it up later.

But, Way to go John Dickinson! "Brought up a Quaker, he took the opportunity of the war to free the thirty-seven slaves on his large Delaware plantation" (Chapter 4, "The Farmer," p 119).

Chapter 4.

William Samuel Johnson, of Connecticut, should be admired and celebrated as equally as the Founding Fathers. (page 140). It was his original proposal to have one branch represented by the people, and one branch by the states. Proportional vs National. That idea progressed to the modern day House of Representatives, and Senate. In my view, that was brilliant! Those institutions has withstood the tests of time, and further, strengthened or weakened over the years. Today's threat of removing the fillibuster (by the Democrats) is an example of a potential weakening, for the US Senate has always decided on consequential issues facing this country. Should the fillibuster be removed, the US Senate will lose a check (against the House) (again, my opinion). In summary, Madison left Philadelphia with more defeats than victories, but his influence was prevalent throughout.

These are last week's assignment for those catching up over Labor Day:

Week Four: August 31st to September 6th (125 - 174)
Chapter Four: Philadelphia - p. 125

This is this week's assignment coming up for Labor Day moving forward:

Week Five: September 7th - September 13th (174 - 224)
Chapter Five: Compromise - p. 174

Chapter 5/Compromise. 1st Section.

I had known how the Electoral College worked---I've voted in primaries in which the potential electors of the various candidates are elected, but I hadn't known anything of how it came about---that it was one of the major compromises of the Constitutional Convention.

Overwhelmingly, they didn't want a direct vote by the populace. So who, then? "Madison argued, [that] election by any 'standing body' would find its members being courted and intrigued with by the Candidates, by their partizans, and by the Ministers of foreign powers" (James Madison, p. 219). That hadn't occurred to me. I am continually reminded of how much thought Madison had done concerning the new constitution.

As Spock was wont to say, "Fascinating."

by Ralph Louis Ketcham (no photo)

Chapter 5/Compromise. "Entirely at a Loss"

"The next day, July 26, George Mason called for the executive to be elected [...] for a single, nonrenewable seven-year term" (p. 154).

THIS I will always remember, because I immediately thought of that MM movie, "The Seven-Year Itch." With the exception of FDR, maybe the people are kinda ready for a different president after seven years.

Chapter5/Compromise. "For a King" p 159-161 in my book.

I usually try to find the passage in each section that corresponds to the section title. Has anyone found the connection for "For a King"?
I read the section twice... and I'm at a loss.

I have no idea Adelle - in the previous segment the author spends some time regarding Rufus King's objections regarding slavery and the counting of slaves. Also in the previous sections - King was said to state: "At all events, either slaves should not be represented, or exports should be taxable.� Morris then thought he could get on his bulldozer and abolish slavery and they all shut him down.

In this section Madison intervened. He was the only delegate from an agricultural state to argue that Congress should be able to tax exports. However he lost out.

My feeling after reading the segment was that possibly the compromise that was reached was more because of the issue raised by Rufus King in the previous section of the chapter which became a sticky wicket in this section and was debated. Maybe that was why more of a debate ensued - for a King (rufus king) - a play on the name.

No other connection that I saw - and I checked the notes and the sections that came before.

Good question for the author - wish he were here (smile)

Adelle wrote: "Chapter 5/Compromise. "Entirely at a Loss"

"The next day, July 26, George Mason called for the executive to be elected [...] for a single, nonrenewable seven-year term" (p. 154).

THIS I will alwa..."

The idiom "Fish and visitors stink after three days" is defined as an old truism that comes from founding father Benjamin Franklin, who penned it for his Poor Richard’s Almanack.The idea is that fish start smelling if they’re left to sit around for awhile, and that visitors, who keep prolonging a visit, can get to be really annoying, fast.

Thinking of the above and what you said - maybe Presidents after they have been around for awhile are like fish and visitors - some outlast their welcome sooner than even four years - never mind multiple terms or a longer term in office.

Bentley wrote @ 95: " in the previous segment the author spends some time regarding Rufus King's objections regarding slavery and the counting of slaves. ...My feeling after reading the segment was that possibly the compromise that was reached was more because of the issue raised by Rufus King in the previous section of the chapter which became a sticky wicket in this section and was debated."

Mmmm. That's a good theory, Bentley. In this section, King does not get the tax on exports he had wanted. But YES, Madison DID -- unsuccessfully --- press for the tax that King had wanted.

I like even more your observation that issues were raised by King that will continue to be debated.

I had been going down the wrong track. I kept looking in this section something about Madison pushing for big power for the executive... you know.... powers like unto for a king. But I couldn't find support for that. HA!

Those were my thoughts. I thought it was a play on words - from the previous section (not king like monarch but king like in Rufus)

Bentley wrote @ 96 regarding one-term presidents:
The idiom "Fish and visitors stink after three days"

So you made me curious.

From Wikipedia: of the 43 men who have served as President, 22 served one term or less, which is slightly more than half. The average length of a Presidency is about five years.



It's a tough job. All the presidents from my lifetime look considerably aged after a few years in office.

Plus, half the people are almost invariable dissatisfied with them.

"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."--- Abraham Lincoln

“No man will ever bring out of that office the reputation which carries him into it. The honeymoon would be as short in that case as in any other, and its moments of ecstasy would be ransomed by years of torment and hatred.�
� Thomas Jefferson

Yes, I like your quotes.

The people pleasers seem to age more.