The Whig standard. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1843-1844, 1844-08-02
IMPORTANT LETTER FROM Mr.. MADI.
SUN NOW FIRST PUBLISHED.


SUN NOW FIRST PUBLISHED
The Richmond Wing Of Tuesday contains the
following letter from Mr. Madison to Mr.. Rvcs,
of Virginia, written in 1929, and now first made
public. 1t will be seen that both Mr.. Jefferson
and Mr. Madison recognize the principle Of pro-
lection to home industry as a constitutional power
of Congress:
The misinterpretation Of Mr. JeGerson's opinions
0y me FREE TRADERS exposed and refuted by
Mr. Madison
Notwithstanding the repeated and earnest re-
commentators Of protective duties by Mr. Jeffer-
son, both when he was Secretary of State under
General Wasbington's Administration, and subse-
quently when he was President OF the United
States, violent efforts have been made, from time
time, by the disciples of the modern free-trade
school 10 appropriate his name an authority,
even against the constilutionalty of protective
duties. Mr.. Med lffie, in his last speech on the
tariff during the late session of Congress, sought
To explain away all these solemn elaborate and
official testimonies of Mr.. Jefferson's opinions on
this subject by single sentence in private and
unsuded letter Of his to Mr.. Giles in 1925. there
by placing him. in the last year of his life, viru-
ally in contradiction to the whole tenor Of his
public and responsible action, and of his repeat
eddy declared opinions from 1871 down to that
period Mr.. McDnhe thus exntingly introduces
his reference to Mr.. Jeffsrson's letter to Mr..
Giles:
" But in 1925, in letter to Mr.. Giles. he did
speak unequlvocay on that point, and shall
quote a single sentence, which is a conclusive
answer to the argument of the Senator from Vlr-
ginia I'm Rives)
"Cnder the power to regulate commerce, they
assume indefinitely that also over agriculture and
upfac md ca11 latin m fako he
earnings of one OF these branches of industry,
and that, too, the most depressed, and put them
into the pockets of the other, the most Furnishing
of ALL"
The same use havinr been attempted t. be
made Of this letter of Nj. Jefferson in the heated
discussions of lS2s-'29, it was then rebuked and
triumphantly repealed, in noble vindicaion of
the consistency of his deceased friend, Mr.. Madi-
son, in letter addressed by him to MIR. Rives,
which we have recently had the pleasure of read
ing, and of WATCH we are now enabled to lay
literal and exact copy before our readers:
(Copy of letter from Mr. Madison to Mr.. Rlvesl
MONTPELIER, Jan. 23d, 1929.
"Dear Sir: | have received under your cover,
the newspaper containing the explanatory re-
marks on the two letters relating to the power Of
Congress to encourage domestic manufactures.
The writer of the letters is laid under great OBJ
legation by the opportune and opposite interposi-
ton in their behalf The strange misconstruc-
tons which continue to be put on the occasion
and object of them, would produce surprise if
such effects of party or other feelings were less
famarizc1 to US.
81 am truly sorry to observe the persevering
and exuting appeals to The letter Of Mr.. Jeffsr-
son to Mr. Giles. The inconsistency is mon
strous, between the protested veneraton for his
name, and the anxiety to make him avow opin-
Al.
tanned by him in his more deliberate correspond
ence with others, and acted on through his whole
official life.
| can not particularly refer to his letters to
Austin and others but have consulted his elab.
crate report in 1898, when Secretary IF State,
and all his Messages, hen President; and find
in them the most explicit and reiterated sanctions
given to the power to regulate TRADE or COM,
Inerce, in favor of Manufactures, by recommends
ing the expediency of exercising the power for
that purpose, as we'll as for others, distinct
dero rating from the object of revenue.
Having noted the pages in the State papers
published BY Wait, as examined them with an
eye 10 Mr.. Jeffsrson's opinions, refer to them
in the margin as abridging aresearch, if your
curiosity should at any time prompt one.
ITO set up against such evidence of Mr.. JEFF
ferson's direct and settled opinion, the unstudied
and unguarded language incident to hasty and
confidential correspondence, is surely as unrea-
sonable, as it must be disrespectful and unfrend-
", to make letter written under such clrcum-
stances, the basis of charge that he had thro'
SO many years, and on SO many occasions, main
tanned aud acted on the power IN question, with
out discovering that it was not warranted by the
great charter which he had bound himself by
oath not to violate. Every rule of fair construc-
ton, as well as every motive of friendly respect,
ought to favor as much as possible a meaning in
the letter that would reconcile it with the over
whelming evidence of opinions elsewhere avow-
ed, instead of displaying Standardization, by
turning the letter against those opinions.
'Nnr would candid critic be at any loss to
avoid the self-contradiction. The term indef-
nitely on ehch the question of constitntionaity
turns, would seem to imply that definite or linn
tied use Of the power might not be unconstitu-
tiona, and it is fair presumption that the idea
in the mind of the writer, was that an unlimited
or excessive abuse of the power vas equivalent
TO ausurpaton Of it. Is it possible to believe
tb.t Mr. Jnff. rson could have intended to admit.